Korean War Statistics

Originally posted by Romper-Stomper:
That's how it is, RedWolf, all wars are started over either economy, or polotics. Why did we go to war with Saddam Hussein? For the oil in Kuwait.


You're absolutely right of course. World War II was the same. Our governments and the history books they wrote) like to claim how the second world war was fought to stop "the greatest evil the world has ever seen" and to save the Jews and all that crap. The world didn't care about the jewish people. My country turned boatloads of them away...

As far as economic reasons for war.. I don't think that it is ALWAYS a bad reason. Lets face it.. we can't allow petty dictators to hold our economy by the balls (ie: Saddam Hussien). I just hate how our governments pretended that we were fighting to "liberate kuwait". Even fools realized that this wasn't the case.


 
I still don't and may never UNDERSTAND how the americans managed to lose in Vietnam...I can understand them not winning, but to be driven out the country...confusion.

The Americans should have fortified the major cities and secured as much of the country as possible...using the tanks and artillery the americans had I can't see how the North Vietmanise could drive them out.

An interesting fact in that in 1965 the Chinese tried an invasion of Vietnam...it failed (it also wasn't that major).


Concerning the Vietnam War I would agree that sending American troops to support the lesser of two evils (personnally I like the idea of shooting dictators and Robert Mugabwe) was a good thing. Where Vietnam went wrong was that the American military too often targetted the civilian population so boosting support for the Commis. The Americans should have presented the Vietmanese something worth fighting together with the americans for...and the South Vietmanese government fell well short of that.

To subvert the South Vietmanese government would have been my suggestion...it would cause some condemnation but once it is done it can't be un-done so politicans move on pretty quickly!

[This message has been edited by kittenOFchaos (edited September 07, 2001).]
 
Originally posted by kittenOFchaos:
I still don't and may never UNDERSTAND how the americans managed to lose in Vietnam...I can understand them not winning, but to be driven out the country...confusion.

The Americans should have fortified the major cities and secured as much of the country as possible...using the tanks and artillery the americans had I can't see how the North Vietmanise could drive them out.

One thing to remember... the Americans weren't "driven out" so much as they "gave up". American politicians knew they were fighting an unpopular war... Anti-war protests were tearing the country apart and even many of the soldiers themselves no longer wanted to be there. There army was made up of enlisted draftees - fighting against their will.

During the Tet Offensive the Viet Cong took absolutely horrible losses. It's been said that for the most part they were destroyed as an effective fighting force.

Nobody realized this of course. The American public became disillusioned with the war (more so even than before). They were being told that America was winning and that the Viet Cong was almost destroyed... THEN Tet happened. People saw the Viet Cong hit back with a ferocity unlike they had ever seen. The public felt that they had been lied to and that the situation was hopeless.

The communists lost militarily.. but there victory came from the propoganda value.

I think it was Walter Cronkite that went over to Vietnam during Tet... and announced on tv that America was doomed to lose the war.

America simply got tired of fighting.. so they withdrew in '73 after negotiating a fake peace with the North (that nobody actually believed would hold). Cut your losses so to speak. Saigon fell in 1975...
 
I really think that the United States should have funded rebellion groups and sent troops and military aid into Thailand, and then progressed into Saigon, after bombing military compounds in the area.
 
Back
Top Bottom