NationStates Jolt Archive

Discuss.

I disagree. The first step to fixing a mistake is to stop continuing to make the mistake.

"Vietnam was a mistake...but pulling out of Vietnam was a bigger one."

Vietnam wasn't so much a mistake as it was trying to fight with one hand tied behind your back. Pulling out early was a major mistake.

Calling Vietnam a mistake is an understatement. To say pulling out was a mistake is plain stupid. Do you think we should still be there? Wasn't 58,000 dead enough?

"Vietnam was a mistake...but pulling out of Vietnam was a bigger one."

Vietnam wasn't so much a mistake as it was trying to fight with one hand tied behind your back. Pulling out early was a major mistake.
Yeah, we should have just nuked the bastards early on. That would have taught them.

Yeah, we should have just nuked the bastards early on. That would have taught them.
Where the hell did that come from? Who said anything about "nukes?" :headbang:

Where the hell did that come from? Who said anything about "nukes?" :headbang:
You said we shouldn't fight with one hand behind our backs. We should have used nukes early and often. Can't fight one handed.

You said we shouldn't fight with one hand behind our backs. We should have used nukes early and often. Can't fight one handed.
Are you truly that ignorant of the Vietnam War???

In my original post above I was referring to the restraints placed on the US military: no crossing the borders to chase those who just mortored you, no bombing here or there, no this, no that.

Nukes would not only have been stupid, they probably wouldn't have even helped much. It's a non-issue. :rolleyes:

Are you truly that ignorant of the Vietnam War???

In my original post above I was referring to the restraints placed on the US military: no crossing the borders to chase those who just mortored you, no bombing here or there, no this, no that.

Nukes would not only have been stupid, they probably wouldn't have even helped much. It's a non-issue. :rolleyes:
Hint: Crossing boarders is something called "an act of war". Government's aren't about to hand over that ability to a random leader and his marry band of army soldiers to cross boarders and kill people. It would create diplomatic difficulties, to say the least.


And actually, they would have worked rather nicely. Light up a few resisting cities and the NV capital and see how quickly resistance collapses (that and nukes are excellent for destroying tunnels- see bunker busters). Nothing more out there then your claim that congress should delegate the power to declare war to some soldier in the field.

well if we had been fighting a country that was our enemy and had ever done anything bad to us, then an all out fight would have made sense. like ww2 against the japanese

but vietnam was a hotspot in the cold war. we were fighting the soviets by proxy so we couldnt go all out without risking a real war with our "real enemy".

so we fought a half assed war. got way too many of our own men and women killed, killed way too many of their men and women, and left in defeat and confusion

I think we should of sent those 1000(?) troops that were needed near the end that could of won the war but alas if only the public would of agreed

Let's see: the war made 1,900,000 victims (1,100,000 Vietnamese - of which many civilians that were meant to be "protected" from communism or civilians in North Vietnam that were bombed without a declaration of war); the US ended up supporting Mao and Pol Pot - with the Vietnamese and the Soviets as genuine liberators, who got rid of Maoist influence in Southeast Asia; the reason the US were in this was to back a string of corrupt and hated regimes - and going back on their word (as they had been the first country to recognize Ho Shi Minh's government), and supplanting a disastrous French colonial policy; the war resulted in unredeemable psychological traumas and ecological catastrophies.
Well, if all of this was to prevent Soviets from reaching the South Pacific area, and if the defeat meant that they obtained access: HOW THE HELL DID THEY BENEFIT FROM IT?!

I think we should of sent those 1000(?) troops that were needed near the end that could of won the war...HAHAHAHAHA...

that statement is so stupid...in so many ways...

HAHAHAHAHA...

that statement is so stupid...in so many ways...
For once, I agree with you...


(I can't believe I just said that)

Let's see: the war made 1,900,000 victims (1,100,000 Vietnamese - of which many civilians that were meant to be "protected" from communism or civilians in North Vietnam that were bombed without a declaration of war); the US ended up supporting Mao and Pol Pot - with the Vietnamese and the Soviets as genuine liberators, who got rid of Maoist influence in Southeast Asia; the reason the US were in this was to back a string of corrupt and hated regimes - and going back on their word (as they had been the first country to recognize Ho Shi Minh's government), and supplanting a disastrous French colonial policy; the war resulted in unredeemable psychological traumas and ecological catastrophies.
Well, if all of this was to prevent Soviets from reaching the South Pacific area, and if the defeat meant that they obtained access: HOW THE HELL DID THEY BENEFIT FROM IT?!

I'm not American but i did world history and according to most people including me Argesia is right

I personally believe Vietnam wasnt a mistake. Wars depopulate the world, right? If we didn't have war, the worlds population would multiply by 10 in one year. Sure, we can enact legislation that would cut back on how much people can have children, like China. But, we'd be getting rid of peoples natural rights. Now, that sounds pretty Communist to me. I support wars through and through. If I am called back to duty and die, I will die knowing I fought for my damn country. You pansies who complain about Vietnam, and the War in Iraq probably never even did time in either of those wars. So shut up unless you know what the hell you're talking about. I served in Iraq for 2 years and just now came home to the USA. :upyours:

Vietnam was a mistake...taking so long to realize it was a bigger one.

"Vietnam was a mistake...but pulling out of Vietnam was a bigger one."

Vietnam wasn't so much a mistake as it was trying to fight with one hand tied behind your back. Pulling out early was a major mistake.

I have to agree with Eutrusca on this one. The true lesson of Vietnam is that neither Liberals nor Leftists should ever be listened to where foreign affairs are concerned nor permitted political office in time of war. They are a collection of fools, cowards and traitors. Liberals may dismissed as fools while the rest of the Left is nothing more than scum and villainy. Liberals like Michael Totten and Leftists like Chrisopher Hitchens are merely the exceptions who test the rule. Sad but true.

Hint: Crossing boarders is something called "an act of war". Government's aren't about to hand over that ability to a random leader and his marry band of army soldiers to cross boarders and kill people. It would create diplomatic difficulties, to say the least.


And actually, they would have worked rather nicely. Light up a few resisting cities and the NV capital and see how quickly resistance collapses (that and nukes are excellent for destroying tunnels- see bunker busters). Nothing more out there then your claim that congress should delegate the power to declare war to some soldier in the field.
This conversation is frakking OVER! :mad:

This conversation is frakking OVER! :mad:
:rolleyes:

Have fun running away from history Eutrusca. Do come back when you're ready to have a discussion about the political issues behind the war instead of spewing half thought out untruths.

I personally believe Vietnam wasnt a mistake. Wars depopulate the world, right? If we didn't have war, the worlds population would multiply by 10 in one year. Sure, we can enact legislation that would cut back on how much people can have children, like China. But, we'd be getting rid of peoples natural rights. Now, that sounds pretty Communist to me. I support wars through and through. If I am called back to duty and die, I will die knowing I fought for my damn country. You pansies who complain about Vietnam, and the War in Iraq probably never even did time in either of those wars. So shut up unless you know what the hell you're talking about. I served in Iraq for 2 years and just now came home to the USA. :upyours:

I respect your sevice.

That being said, following your reasoning, everyone who hasn't actually fought in a war should shut the hell up...like Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc....

Calling people who disagree with you pansies doesn't exactly further your argument either. Perhaps I should say, "so shut up unless you can make a rational argument! You people who haven't taken debate don't know what the hell you're talking about! :upyours:"

:rolleyes:

Have fun running away from history Eutrusca. Do come back when you're ready to have a discussion about the political issues behind the war instead of spewing half thought out untruths.

That's not exactly helping, CSW...

I have to agree with Eutrusca on this one. The true lesson of Vietnam is that neither Liberals nor Leftists should ever be listened to where foreign affairs are concerned nor permitted political office in time of war. They are a collection of fools, cowards and traitors. Liberals may dismissed as fools while the rest of the Left is nothing more than scum and villainy. Liberals like Michael Totten and Leftists like Chrisopher Hitchens are merely the exceptions who test the rule. Sad but true.

Such broad statements like this can qualify as trolling, so either you knock it off and actually debate without having to insult others, or risk running against the moderators of this site.

Discuss.

First of all, if you're going to make such a broad statement in your title, and say nothing but "Discuss", that can be considered spam. At least make a statement of why you believe what you just said.


HAHAHAHAHA...

that statement is so stupid...in so many ways...

How about instead of insulting someone in which you don't even actually comment on the thread, you contribute to it with your own opinion? Is that too much to ask for? You've continuously insulted people/threads without actually contributing to them (debate/discussion-wise), which qualifies as trolling.


I personally believe Vietnam wasnt a mistake. Wars depopulate the world, right? If we didn't have war, the worlds population would multiply by 10 in one year. Sure, we can enact legislation that would cut back on how much people can have children, like China. But, we'd be getting rid of peoples natural rights. Now, that sounds pretty Communist to me. I support wars through and through. If I am called back to duty and die, I will die knowing I fought for my damn country. You pansies who complain about Vietnam, and the War in Iraq probably never even did time in either of those wars. So shut up unless you know what the hell you're talking about. I served in Iraq for 2 years and just now came home to the USA.
Please refrain from insulting others when making statements such as this. They only hurt the actual debate, and send it spiraling into a flamefest. Use proper debating to counter others.

I respect your sevice.

That being said, following your reasoning, everyone who hasn't actually fought in a war should shut the hell up...like Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc....

Calling people who disagree with you pansies doesn't exactly further your argument either. Perhaps I should say, "so shut up unless you can make a rational argument! You people who haven't taken debate don't know what the hell you're talking about! " :upyours:

Knock it off. The smilie that you used says it all, which you are using to flame the person. If you dont like what someone says, don't respond to it, especially if they are breaking the rules. Responding makes you just as guilty.

~Euroslavia the Forum Moderator