[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Um.... What?

"Survey in France: Who is, According to You, the Country That Contributed Most to Germany's Defeat in 1945?"

hF2DD50E3

when I was a kid I used to think America some sort of super nation spreading victory, peace, prosperity across the globe and most of their population are consist of superman and superwoman, hero and heroine, put one of the most loser of their peoples into remote area in third world country, they can bring changes, becomes hero and King and legend and spread justice.

I remember how I was shock after I knew the fact that America lost the vietnam war from my father, I always say "no you are joking with me dad" because according to Tour Of Duty (my favourite tv show at that time, I was like elementary school) it is not how the way it is.

In TV the place where I learn most of the reality at that time, reality is pretty much oppositely different than in the real world.
 
To be fair victory would have been more unlikely if those three powers were not united against Nazis. All of them did the great job but soviets paid the heaviest toll.
 
Haroon said:
I remember how I was shock after I knew the fact that America lost the vietnam war from my father, I always say "no you are joking with me dad" because according to Tour Of Duty (my favourite tv show at that time, I was like elementary school) it is not how the way it is.

it's more like they quit than they lost. they far from lost in terms of body count.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

United States
58,220 dead; 303,644 wounded

North Vietnam & Viet Cong
50,000–65,000 civilian dead
400,000–1,100,000 military dead or missing
600,000+ wounded

Vietnamese civilian dead: 245,000–2,000,000 (both sides)

I remember Red Alert 2 online games I played in my youth where the other player basically overwhelmed me and had the game all but won, but I held out in a defensive location that would have taken another 2 hours to take over although the result would be secure. The other player would say "you're the weakest link, bye" and quit. That's basically what happened.
 
I remember Red Alert 2 online games I played in my youth where the other player basically overwhelmed me and had the game all but won, but I held out in a defensive location that would have taken another 2 hours to take over although the result would be secure. The other player would say "you're the weakest link, bye" and quit. That's basically what happened.

My brother did that to me. I played it out and won, but we agreed never again. It was the navy varient and we were both France on different islands so basically the super cannons would tank any ships, and there were no vehicles so all defenses by land had to be breached by infantry. Meanwhile, he could build defenses faster than I could attack him so I had to build a hidden base to get a giant infantry army while I slow built a fake navy to keep him distracted. Such a satisfying win but so not the fun way to play.
 
So if you quit you dont lose? I will apply for chess world championship then, i have not idea about chess but if i quit in every game i cant lose.

USA lost that war, repeat with me L-O-S-T. Of course there were many more deaths among vietnamesse than among americans. We are speaking about the most powerful army in the world against a country of rice famers. Which makes it even a worse defeat. Neither napalm, B-52s, orange agent nor any other dirty tricks USA pulled out of the hat broke the vietnamese determination. It was a case of money and technology versus cojones, but this time cojones won. Be man enough and get over it for god's sake. :rolleyes:
 
So if you quit you dont lose? I will apply for chess world championship then, i have not idea about chess but if i quit in every game i cant lose.

USA lost that war, repeat with me L-O-S-T. Of course there were many more deaths among vietnamesse than among americans. We are speaking about the most powerful army in the world against a country of rice famers. Which makes it even a worse defeat. Neither napalm, B-52s, orange agent nor any other dirty tricks USA pulled out of the hat broke the vietnamese determination. It was a case of money and technology versus cojones, but this time cojones won. Be man enough and get over it for god's sake. :rolleyes:


Yeah, this is right. Vietnam was a loss for America.
 
it's more like they quit than they lost. they far from lost in terms of body count.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

United States
58,220 dead; 303,644 wounded

North Vietnam & Viet Cong
50,000–65,000 civilian dead
400,000–1,100,000 military dead or missing
600,000+ wounded

Vietnamese civilian dead: 245,000–2,000,000 (both sides)

I remember Red Alert 2 online games I played in my youth where the other player basically overwhelmed me and had the game all but won, but I held out in a defensive location that would have taken another 2 hours to take over although the result would be secure. The other player would say "you're the weakest link, bye" and quit. That's basically what happened.

The US don't meet their objective, while the Vietnam did, that is enough to say IMHO that US lost the war. As Thorgaleg said, in Chess, resignation mean defeat, no matter how many material you win from your opponent, once you resign you are officially defeated. Argumentation that your opponent lost more pieces than you not count.

And that is a good analogy. That is a fact. And I pretty much admire the Vietnamese determination and struggle in war during that time. I like to play a war game where I play as Vietnamese rebels against US occupation, even though I don't like first shooter action game, but that idea seems interesting to me. Also playing as natives Americans against foreign invader, that also sound very cool game.
 
I can only really think of Afghanistan...
 
What was the next major communist expansion after Vietnam?

How is that relevant? For it to be relevant, you would have to argue that communist insurgents restrained themselves because of fear of a US intervention. Which isn't a rational expectation.

By the end of the Vietnam War, communism was doing poorly everywhere at meeting it's own stated goals. So was less attractive to people.
 
How is that relevant? For it to be relevant, you would have to argue that communist insurgents restrained themselves because of fear of a US intervention. Which isn't a rational expectation.

You're basically predicting the relevance, you're just playing it down. There are long odds that it would've suppressed any insurgencies, but it would've played a critical factor in the outside funding of those insurgencies. Now, a dollar spent sucking your superpower opponent into a landwar with locals is a dollar well-spent (in the Cold War sense), but it quickly reaches diminishing returns if the goal is to actually win that landwar using outside support.

Vietnam was sold as a chess move in the Cold War, it should be somewhat judged that way. Or, at least, a nod given in that direction.

I mean, we can judge Iraq to be a fairly big failure, given how it was so heavily sold as a way to fight Islamic Terror.
 
Afghanistan, Angola, Benin, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Somalia, Nicaragua

I would go with Ethiopia, as both Angola and Mozambique were just unbelievable mess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom