:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Other than that nifty black wall - not much.
Someone remind me, are the Vietnamese good commies or bad commies?
What America gained from Vietnam
- Tiger Woods
- plenty of fodder for Hollywood
- the phrase “We had to destroy it to save it”
- a Nobel Peace Prize for one of its most illustrious leaders
I never said I hated the US, I was just describing the effects of our attempts to liberate Vietnam from communism. The effects are undeniable, we did all those things to Vietnam. I never said anything about the French, but they are almost as reprehensible as the US. At least the French taught the Vietnamese to make good bread.
When Carter was asked if he was going to pay reparations to the Vietnamese, he said, “the damage was mutual.” So 2,000,000 Vietnamese lives = 58,000 American lives. I guess the relative value of human lives is pegged to the currency exchange rate.
You’re absolutely right. I used the wrong words there.
Cite?
I mean, Jimmy Carter might have paid a lot of lip service to human rights, but as President he was plenty chummy with many of the world’s most evil and homicidal dictators.
Vietnam taught us that using millions of litres of chemical waepons on a country will make it’s people very ill for a long time into the future.
Perhaps the U.S. lost in Vietnam, but that was just one local theater in a global conflict, the Cold War – which we one.
In his book Vietnam the Necessary War (New York: The Free Press, 1999), Michael Lind argued that it was necessary for the U.S. to fight in Vietnam, not so much to win that conflict but to shore up America’s credibility in the eyes of other nations that were not fully committed to the Western or Communist side of the Cold War. The war was essential for its “bandwagon effect.”
And I once heard Dr. Jerry Pournelle (sf writer with conservative leanings) argue that the Vietnam War did help us to win the Cold War, by draining resources from the U.S.S.R. E.g., an army jeep gets manufactured in a factory in Russia, then shipped to North Vietnam, then promptly blown up by U.S. action – it’s all just money down the whole for the Russians, a waste of materials and labor that might have been better used for domestic consumption. And the main reason the Soviet Union ultimately collapsed was its economic bankruptcy. The Americans could afford to waste a whole lot of money on military adventures, but the Soviets could not afford it.
I’m not entirely convinced of either if these theories, but they do provide a useful frame for the debate: If the United States had not intervened in Vietnam, would we have won the Cold War as early as we did? Does anybody have an opinion?
Whether the Cold War itself was worth fighting or worth winning is, of course, a different discussion.
Exactly. Viet Nam wanted indepence and they got it. They won, just as Ho said they would. And now nobody wants to mess with them. A conflict can’t end with victory on one side and a “draw” on the other.
Peace,
mangeorge
I think there was a brief period of time when the US might have played footsie with Ho, pissed off France, and unified Viet Nam as a social democratic country. We might have also pissed off China, too.
The war did help bring an end to the “Hippy” movement.
Corporations made lots of money selling munitions to the government.
Lots of Vietnamese refugees.
We killed 2,000,000 people defending capitalist economists that can’t do grammar school algebra. They can’t figure out automobiles depreciate.
Like Bob Dylan said, “Look out kid they keep it all hid.”
The Vietnam War was fought about economics but we can’t teach 700 year old accounting to highschool kids. Then banks bombard them with credit cards freshman year in college.
Dal Timgar
Posted by mangeorge:
Are you sure about that? Seems to me the war helped the counterculture keep going much longer than it might have otherwise, and gave the counterculture much more popular appeal for young people than it might have had otherwise.
No, BrainGlutton, I think the war brought common cause to the movement and the establishment. Remenber, a big part of the initial appeal of the hippy lifestyle was reaction to the repressive 50’s. Then the war added to the movement. As the war went on and on, mainstream America grew tired of it and began to move over to the hippy POV. By the time it all ended you would see all sorts of people, hardhats, hippies, cowboys, republicans, etc at rallies.
What real hippies were left settled in New Mexico.
True, carter looked the other way in Indonesia (i never understood why he did that)
Sad but true. Carter supported the slaughter in East Timor, and even supported Somoza almost until the end of his reign. Funny thing is, I knew people from South America who viewed Carter as this angel of human rights. He fooled everybody.
For those who say the US did not lose the war seem to forget what War actually is, at least according to folks like Clauswitz. It is not merely about Military victories or targets destroyed. War is an extension of politics and the political goals of both sides.
If you go to war with a set goal, say the preservation of The “democracy” of South Vietnam and the prevention of the spread of popular communist uprsings in other South east Asian coutries, and you fail to do so you can not claim you did not lose.
If the enemy does not submit even after you have defeated their armies and destroyed much of their infra structure you can not call it a draw.
If your enemy’s goal is to remove your infuence from the peninsula, gain poltical control of the soutrhern portion of the country, and they do so, they have, in fact, won the war.
Also, the domino therory was first brought up in refernce to the Korean conflict. Considering the number of countried in Asia that fell to communist governements from that point in time I’d say the domino theory was not total bunk.
Well then there should also be a page number in a book, or perhaps a url in that memory. You had to read that quote somewhere.
You’re new, so I’ll be nice and tell you that this sort of thing doesn’t fly around here. If you’re going to assert something factual like that, you’re going to have to back it up.
To say “no cite, my memory is good!” will get your arguments laughed at.