If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attackson the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
They had bases, air ops, special ops, etc. throughout and up to
liberation. The "Vietnamesation" of the war was the result of the military unable to win. But the "2 1/2 years" as you put it was the result of the DoD having a losing strategy and unable to complete it's mission...what ever that was at any given time, but generally to keep the south of Vietnam carved out of the Vietnamese nation. It failed to do that. The U.S. lost the war. We tried to dictate to another people how they should live. We tried to divide a nation in two thinking that a German or Korean solution was the answer. Our gov't screwed up and should of learned the *political* lessons of the French defeat. D. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:37:18 -0400, Planet Visitor II
wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:46:53 +0100, Bill wrote: You're not dealing with some snotty kid still wet behind the ears here. Hippies were well fortified with their own invented facts. Me, a hippy! You been smokin' some of that weed again boy? I remember the headlines at the time. Ah, yes... the good ol' media. Dan Rather and Co. Not where I live boy. And at the time everyone was fully aware that it was a conference cynically designed to get the US out of Vietnam and South Vietnam, who didn't get a voice at the conference, would be left to rot. "Everyone"??? Yes everyone. No exceptions... Let's cut to the chase. Are you claiming that the U.S. military LOST the war in Vietnam, in the face of for 2 and a half years not having a single combat boot on the ground, and not having dropped a single bomb in any air strike on North or South Vietnam??? Ran away and left their allies to the mercy of the bloody handed Communists. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2935347.stm The US Armed Forces never lost a battle, but armies only fight battles. Countries fight wars, and the USA lost this one... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 09:58:54 -0700 (PDT), David Walters wrote:
They had bases, air ops, special ops, etc. throughout and up to liberation. Wrong. There was only an embassy staff of military and a few advisors who were not armed or engaged in any offensive act toward the Viet Cong or North Vietnam, when North Vietnam illegally invaded South Vietnam. The "Vietnamesation" of the war was the result of the military unable to win. But the "2 1/2 years" as you put it was the result of the DoD having a losing strategy and unable to complete it's mission...what ever that was at any given time, but generally to keep the south of Vietnam carved out of the Vietnamese nation. It failed to do that. South Vietnam had been "carved out" of North Vietnam for 2 and 1/2 years; while North Vietnam recovered from Linebacker II, and rearmed sufficiently to strike out illegally against South Vietnam. What is interesting is that you SUPPORT illegal war. It makes it likely that you support in historical terms the Nazi illegal invasion of Poland. After all, if you support one illegal war, everyone can see that you have no problem supporting illegal wars. The U.S. lost the war. We tried to dictate to another people how they should live. We tried to divide a nation in two thinking that a German or Korean solution was the answer. Our gov't screwed up and should of learned the *political* lessons of the French defeat. Arguing with people like you is like arguing Christ is not the Son of God, with a Christian. You spew out some rubbish that you demand be accepted as "fact from God almighty," then draw your own conclusion and insist that the world is flat. The 2 and a 1/2 years was a result of a SIGNED peace treaty!! This is not an opinion, as all your comment are... this is a FACT!! It is also a FACT that not one U.S. military combat boot had been on the ground in South Vietnam for 2 and 1/2 years, before the ILLEGAL invasion of South Vietnam by North Vietnam. Those are irrefutable FACTS, rather than your obviously biased anti-American opinion. It takes a lot of chutzpah on your part to ignore those facts, and develop your own separate *flat-earth* set of facts (sic). We did not violate that peace treaty; and had North Vietnam not invaded South Vietnam, South Vietnam *could be* as successful as South Korea, if it ever managed to eliminate it's corrupt government. Or do you insist that would be impossible because you think the South Vietnamese were not as desirous in the 1970s of economic prosperity as were the South Koreans of 1960? After all, South Korea did it, and Syngman Rhee is a distant memory, being removed by a PEACEFUL revolution (the April 19th Student Revolution of 1960). Are you claiming that the South Vietnamese were ALL corrupt, and only opposed North Vietnam's illegal invasion because they were ALL corrupt?? Are you claiming that the South Vietnamese could have NEVER been as successful as South Korea in ridding herself of a corrupt government? What an insult to the South Vietnamese!! So instead you insult the South Vietnamese and the U.S. military; while there was not a U.S. combat boot on the ground when North Vietnam VIOLATED the terms of the very agreement THEY were a party to and invaded North Vietnam. Planet Visitor II D. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 07:35:07 -0700 (PDT), David Walters wrote:
On Mar 31, 6:06*pm, Planet Visitor II wrote: In point of fact, North Vietnam and the Viet Cong "blinked first" by returning to the peace table, knowing full well that if they didn't they would suffer an enormous destruction from the air with a Linebacker III. "Blinked"? Hahahaha. They knew *exactly* what they did and the fake 'blink' was the US blinking thinking it had expunged the sovereignty of the Vietnamese people. No proof offered. Your claim fails. The US could *not* defeat Vietnam militarily You are obviously trying to refer to "North Vietnam," but the spittle rolled off of your lower lip onto your hand over the keyboard and in the process of wiping it away you neglected to specific which part of Vietnam you were referring to. In any case, your comment is all bull****. The U.S. MILITARY had ALREADY brought North Vietnam to her knees with Linebacker II. but they could force them to the negotiating table. The Vietnamese needed the extra time, and, they didn't feel any form of "Treaty" that was being forced down their throat was at all legit, given the sheer number of civilian deaths in the north and south of the country. Now you're just babbling incoherently. The US had zero right to negotiate a damn thing and deservedly got booted out of Vietnam along with their puppet government. Prove it. Since if that were the case, North Vietnam would have not negotiated with the U.S. regarding a peace treaty. The North Vietnamese seemed to believe the U.S. had a right to negotiate, as did the Viet Cong. Who are you to tell the North Vietnamese what to believe?? The US was defeated politically which means that all aspects of the war there were defeated, including the *total inability* of the US war machine to *win*. The military *lost* as much as the political side lost, as they were one and the same. No proof offered. Your claim fails. Dinosaur historians as you've all seen here love to argue that US never 'lost', as if abstracting battles and engagement constitutes a "war". Gee... a kill ratio of 10 to 1 tends to argue there was a "war," and the side killing 10 to losing 1... was the winner. War is, as Clausewitz, politics by other means. That's why the North Vietnamese came to the political peace agreement in Paris. Who won? The question regards the claim that the U.S. MILITARY lost the war. If it was politics, it wasn't the U.S. MILITARY. The U.S. MILITARY is lawfully prohibited from MAKING political decisions. They can only advise. After all, remember that Truman sacked MacArthur. Vietnam. You mean North or South??? You're babbling again. Who lost? The U.S. And the world was better off for it. No proof offered. Your claim fails. But it's interesting you speak of Clausewitz. Was he in favor of illegal wars? Because you obviously are! How about that Hitler invasion of Russia while there was a "peace treaty" between the two? Support one illegal war with a peace treaty in existence being violated... support all illegal war with a peace treaty in existence being violated. Planet Visitor II David |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:50:27 +0100, Bill wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:37:18 -0400, Planet Visitor II wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:46:53 +0100, Bill wrote: You're not dealing with some snotty kid still wet behind the ears here. Hippies were well fortified with their own invented facts. Me, a hippy! You been smokin' some of that weed again boy? I'm not your "boy." Apparently you were spitting on those marching in the Birmingham Civil Rights protest. I remember the headlines at the time. Ah, yes... the good ol' media. Dan Rather and Co. Not where I live boy. Oh, yeah... right from the KKK. And at the time everyone was fully aware that it was a conference cynically designed to get the US out of Vietnam and South Vietnam, who didn't get a voice at the conference, would be left to rot. "Everyone"??? Yes everyone. No exceptions... Since I know a great number of people, and I include myself, as disagreeing with your conclusion, it is proven to be an inaccurate claim. Let's cut to the chase. Are you claiming that the U.S. military LOST the war in Vietnam, in the face of for 2 and a half years not having a single combat boot on the ground, and not having dropped a single bomb in any air strike on North or South Vietnam??? Ran away and left their allies to the mercy of the bloody handed Communists. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2935347.stm And how long did the English run away from the bloody handed Nazis, and wait to reclaim Europe from the Nazis and end the Holocaust? Let's see... Dunkirk --ended June 1940. WW II - ended 8 May 1945. Give it a month less than FIVE YEARS. Twice as long as it took the North Vietnamese to illegally invade South Vietnam. Left Europe to the bloody handed Nazis for five years. Since we're now throwing stones. Not only that... you needed HELP from the U.S. military. The US Armed Forces never lost a battle, but armies only fight battles. And there you have it. Agreement with my comment that "the U.S. MILITARY DID NOT lose the war in Vietnam." Pay careful attention to the wording of that claim. Countries fight wars, and the USA lost this one... My comments have always referred to the U.S. MILTARY. Whatever political choices were made has nothing to do with the U.S. MILITARY, since by law the U.S. MILITARY does not make political decisions of ANY kind. They can only advise those who do make such political decisions. Planet Visitor II |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 02:36:23 -0400, Planet Visitor II
wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:50:27 +0100, Bill wrote: The US Armed Forces never lost a battle, but armies only fight battles. And there you have it. Agreement with my comment that "the U.S. MILITARY DID NOT lose the war in Vietnam." Pay careful attention to the wording of that claim. Countries fight wars, and the USA lost this one... My comments have always referred to the U.S. MILTARY. Whatever political choices were made has nothing to do with the U.S. MILITARY, since by law the U.S. MILITARY does not make political decisions of ANY kind. They can only advise those who do make such political decisions. Utter lunacy. The USA was well thrashed. If the politicians tell you to run away the army runs away. It remains beaten... 'The stab in the back' remains a fiction used by defeated armies throughout history. Face it son, you got whipped... |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attackson the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Apr 2, 12:36*am, Planet Visitor II wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:50:27 +0100, Bill wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:37:18 -0400, Planet Visitor II wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:46:53 +0100, Bill wrote: You're not dealing with some snotty kid still wet behind the ears here. Hippies were well fortified with their own invented facts. Me, *a hippy! You been smokin' some of that weed again boy? I'm not your "boy." *Apparently you were spitting on those marching in the Birmingham Civil Rights protest. I remember the headlines at the time. Ah, yes... the good ol' media. *Dan Rather and Co. Not where I live boy. Oh, yeah... right from the KKK. And at the time everyone was fully aware that it was a conference cynically designed to get the US out of Vietnam and South Vietnam, who didn't get a voice at the conference, would be left to rot. "Everyone"??? Yes everyone. No exceptions... Since I know a great number of people, and I include myself, as disagreeing with your conclusion, it is proven to be an inaccurate claim. Let's cut to the chase. *Are you claiming that the U.S. military LOST the war in Vietnam, in the face of for 2 and a half years not having a single combat boot on the ground, and not having dropped a single bomb in any air strike on North or South Vietnam??? Ran away and left their allies to the mercy of the bloody handed Communists. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...21/newsid_2935... And how long did the English run away from the bloody handed Nazis, and wait to reclaim Europe from the Nazis and end the Holocaust? *Let's see... Dunkirk --ended June 1940. *WW II - ended 8 May 1945. *Give it a month less than FIVE YEARS. *Twice as long as it took the North Vietnamese to illegally invade South Vietnam. *Left Europe to the bloody handed Nazis for five years. Since we're now throwing stones. *Not only that... you needed HELP from the U.S. military. The US Armed Forces never lost a battle, *but armies only fight battles. And there you have it. *Agreement with my comment that "the U.S. MILITARY DID NOT lose the war in Vietnam." *Pay careful attention to the wording of that claim. Countries fight wars, *and the USA lost this one... My comments have always referred to the U.S. MILTARY. *Whatever political choices were made has nothing to do with the U.S. MILITARY, since by law the U.S. MILITARY does not make political decisions of ANY kind. *They can only advise those who do make such political decisions. Planet Visitor II LOL |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:04:04 +0100, Bill wrote:
On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 02:36:23 -0400, Planet Visitor II wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:50:27 +0100, Bill wrote: The US Armed Forces never lost a battle, but armies only fight battles. And there you have it. Agreement with my comment that "the U.S. MILITARY DID NOT lose the war in Vietnam." Pay careful attention to the wording of that claim. deathly silence Countries fight wars, and the USA lost this one... My comments have always referred to the U.S. MILTARY. Whatever political choices were made has nothing to do with the U.S. MILITARY, since by law the U.S. MILITARY does not make political decisions of ANY kind. They can only advise those who do make such political decisions. Utter lunacy. In other words, you have nothing rational to offer. Have you considered banging your shoe on the rostrum at the UN?? The USA was well thrashed. I guess we should have nuked Hanoi. Would you then claim the U.S. Military had not lost the war in Vietnam?? If the politicians tell you to run away the army runs away. The only ones who "ran away" were the South Vietnamese, two and a half years after the last American combat boot had left South Vietnam, or any combat action in Vietnam had taken place. Then the North Vietnamese ILLEGALLY invaded South Vietnam. I suppose your argument is that because the North Vietnamese ILLEGALLY invaded South Vietnam, and violated a peace agreement forged with the U.S., the U.S. MILITARY SHOULD HAVE used a nuke against Hanoi, and since the U.S. MILITARY DIDN'T - that's your "proof" they lost the war. It remains beaten... Oh... the agony of de feet. Perhaps you're ****ed that the U.S. Military didn't return to Vietnam as a result of the ILLEGAL invasion of South Vietnam by the North Vietnamese, in order to kill a few more million Vietnamese to satisfy your bloodlust. Yeah... I can see why you'd consider the U.S. military "lost." We didn't kill enough of the Vietnamese people to satisfy that bloodlust of yours, and killing ten Vietnamese for every American lost just isn't enough for you, since you expect the "winner" to kill at least 100 to 1. Of course, we could have done 10,000 to 1 with that good ol' nuke that you "wish" we had used so you could call us "winners." What's a few POWs being killed as "collateral damage," in nuking Hanoi, as far as you're concerned??? 'The stab in the back' remains a fiction used by defeated armies throughout history. Well, you are the "master of fiction." Face it son, you got whipped... Considering that you were still trying to get Susie into dropping her knickers in the third grade when the Vietnam war raged, how would you know, little man? Planet Visitor II |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"..on December 30, 1972, after eleven days of those B-52 attacks on the Hanoi area, you had won the war. It was over..."
On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 05:41:01 -0700 (PDT), chatnoir wrote:
On Apr 2, 12:36*am, Planet Visitor II wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:50:27 +0100, Bill wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:37:18 -0400, Planet Visitor II wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:46:53 +0100, Bill wrote: You're not dealing with some snotty kid still wet behind the ears here. Hippies were well fortified with their own invented facts. Me, *a hippy! You been smokin' some of that weed again boy? I'm not your "boy." *Apparently you were spitting on those marching in the Birmingham Civil Rights protest. I remember the headlines at the time. Ah, yes... the good ol' media. *Dan Rather and Co. Not where I live boy. Oh, yeah... right from the KKK. And at the time everyone was fully aware that it was a conference cynically designed to get the US out of Vietnam and South Vietnam, who didn't get a voice at the conference, would be left to rot. "Everyone"??? Yes everyone. No exceptions... Since I know a great number of people, and I include myself, as disagreeing with your conclusion, it is proven to be an inaccurate claim. Let's cut to the chase. *Are you claiming that the U.S. military LOST the war in Vietnam, in the face of for 2 and a half years not having a single combat boot on the ground, and not having dropped a single bomb in any air strike on North or South Vietnam??? Ran away and left their allies to the mercy of the bloody handed Communists. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...21/newsid_2935... And how long did the English run away from the bloody handed Nazis, and wait to reclaim Europe from the Nazis and end the Holocaust? *Let's see... Dunkirk --ended June 1940. *WW II - ended 8 May 1945. *Give it a month less than FIVE YEARS. *Twice as long as it took the North Vietnamese to illegally invade South Vietnam. *Left Europe to the bloody handed Nazis for five years. Since we're now throwing stones. *Not only that... you needed HELP from the U.S. military. The US Armed Forces never lost a battle, *but armies only fight battles. And there you have it. *Agreement with my comment that "the U.S. MILITARY DID NOT lose the war in Vietnam." *Pay careful attention to the wording of that claim. Countries fight wars, *and the USA lost this one... My comments have always referred to the U.S. MILTARY. *Whatever political choices were made has nothing to do with the U.S. MILITARY, since by law the U.S. MILITARY does not make political decisions of ANY kind. *They can only advise those who do make such political decisions. Planet Visitor II LOL Tell that to MacArthur, and his policy of "In war there is no substitute for victory." That was the policy of the U.S. military until Truman decided that it wasn't. And the world did a flip-flop at that moment. Truman forgot that he only became a national figure because Roosevelt died. And Roosevelt's policy went right along with MacArthur's with his "unconditional surrender." Anyone who would argue that the Soviets were actually going to enter into a war with the U.S. if the U.S. decided to use a nuclear weapon to exterminate the communist leadership of Communist China in one fell swoop, is living in fairy land. In April 1951, the Soviets would have been shaking in their boots at the thought of engaging the U.S. in a nuclear war, or coming to the defense of a leaderless China, being threatened by both the U.S. nuclear might and the Chinese Nationalists rag-tag army being reinvigorated. Planet Visitor II |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DC rally by conservatives: "tens of thousands?" "three hundredthousand?" "five hundred thousand?" "A million people came?" The only thingagreed upon was that it was a "vast crowd" and it spells big tr | O'Donovan, PJ, Himself | Europe | 16 | August 31st, 2010 04:16 AM |
"President" B. Hussein Obama "likely" to speak about attempted Xmas09 Muslim terror attack in "next few days" | PJ O'Donovan[_3_] | Europe | 0 | December 28th, 2009 12:05 PM |
The First 100 days: Will Barack Hussein Obama Say "Ich bin einMuslimer " oder "Ich bin ein Dhimmi ?" | PJ O'Donovan | Europe | 7 | January 28th, 2009 09:25 PM |
"liberalism" to "socialism" to "communism": The "end" justifies the "means" in America | PJ O'Donovan[_1_] | Europe | 5 | February 24th, 2007 04:57 PM |