how did he beat the french and yankies?
How did he beat the french and yankies?
They sent Vietnamese bitches to fuck their men until exhaustion.
They choose not to Nuke him
Home field advantage.
Isn't it wild they even gave us like a million of their bitches like a doggy bag?
literally who
go back to your goon cage btw
The vietnamese people did it.
half of vietnamese people fought for imperialists though
how did he beat the french and yankies?
5th Column libtards on the homefront.
Uh no.
Wax on wax off
fought poorly
is that Charlie?
did libtards traveled vietnam to kill 100k yankies in the jungles? i didnt know that.
how did he beat the french and yankies?
Marx' teaching proved itself. The colonialism is gone. Vietnamese workers and peasants appeared to be developed and educated enough for the antiimperialism resistance.
they had soviet SAMs
did libtards traveled vietnam to kill 100k yankies in the jungles? i didnt know that.
Hence why I said "on the homefront". Work on your reading comprehension, ESL mudslime.
And the red army.
magical soviets SAMs hard to move produce and operate
The same way the Taliban beat both Soviet and the USA. They kept losing untill they won.
Collusion.
dont care
you lost to vietcong, taliban and houthis recently
vietcong guerillas killed 100k american terrorists
wounded 500k imperialists
1 trillion wasted on vietnam war
The same way the Taliban beat both Soviet and the USA. They kept losing untill they won.
wat how come germany lost then despite making deliberate losing sacrifices in the hopes it would please god
vietnam and afghanistan are fairly simple to lose with one study of their history unless you are going to genocide the entire countryside, the terrain just isn't something you can control and if south gooks can't ideologically fix their northern ones that's their problem
We could've wiped the entire place out at anytime, but just like Iraq, it was a gay jewish police action.
Unlimited supplies from China
We could've wiped the entire place
u dropped more bombs in vietnam than entire ww2 though
invade country and stick around for a decade and try to be it's police force while trying to prop up incompetent local governments,
lost
again, if winning is killing everyone to you, we can do that at anytime
The war was viewed as a revolt against foreign conquerors in Vietnam. The commie shit was window dressing. Even now, it isn't taken seriously.
god forbids they keep trading
how many nukes did we drop?
He didn't do shit. Giap did everything.
if winning is killing everyone to you
this american argument though. "we killed more vietcong therefore we won!"
People constantly misunderstand the vietnamese war, because it being so controversial and unpopular domestically coloured perception of it for generations thereafter
US deploys to fulfill security agreements with democratic South Vietnam
communist North Vietnamese are driven from the south, retreat into neighbouring Cambodia.
US stops, says "we are not fighting an offensive war against North Vietnam" and takes up a security role in the south
Under their security agreement, the US would provide security for the South, but the South would be responsible for any offensive action taken against the North to end the war
South just doesn't
North repeatedly invades and is repeatedly defeated by the US, eventually the US begins bombing their command and control in the north
Northern government and military flees to Cambodia
South still refuses to do anything, North still refuses to end the war
US props up an increasing corrupt and unstable South government for decades until it becomes apparent that the South's leaders rely entirely on American handouts and the government only exists to do the bare minimum to extract donations from America
US terminates the agreement and leaves
Southern government instantly collapses and North walks in unopposed
Vietnam was a policy failure for numerous reasons and a costly deployment but never close to a military defeat for the US. By the end of the war, the PAVN was almost entirely made up of Laos and Cambodian citizens because they couldn't run recruitment in the north.
So why didn't the US just win
The US was committed from the start to not deposing the North's government and not crossing a single US soldier north of the border. Their only goal was to protect the South's government until such a time that it could negotiate a peace with the North, or build up its own armed force enough to defend itself.
Unlimited supplies from China
But in facts Pro-Nixon maoists sponsored Pol Pot's regime against Vietnamese people democracy.
browns can't understand this
The decisive war was not the Vietnam/American war but the French Indochina War.
burger dindu nuffism?
yeah americans lost because they failed at their own strategic goals and north overrun south.
brown fingers
Not entirely true. China did support Vietnam in the beginning of the war. They only stopped doing so after Nixon’s meeting with Mao.
History of Vietnam
Enslaved by China for 1000 years and used as sex slaves
"Slave girls of Viet, sleek of buttery flesh."
The writer Nguyen Huy Thiep writes "the most significant characteristics of this country are its smallness and weakness. She is like a virgin girl raped by Chinese civilisation. The girl concurrently enjoys, despises and is humiliated by the rape."
Vassalized by China for the next 1000 years
Song Emperor Taizong to King Le Hoan in 979: "You fly and leap like savages. You drink through your noses. When you talk, you sound like birds. Let us teach you the knowledge of the proper laws. Do you want to discard your garments of leaves and grass?"
Half the "native" dynasties were founded by Han Chinese immigrants
Enslaved by Ming China
During military "victories" the capital was destroyed and the main "strategy" was to hide in the mountains while the invaders suffered from heat, bugs and disease and eventually left
Begged Qing China for help against France
Colonized and enslaved by France
Vietnamese were called "Annamites"
No such thing as "Vietnamese culture"
youtube.com
Claims they invented rice cultivation
Literally invented nothing
en.wikipedia.org
Pho was created by Chinese immigrants
National dish is a sandwich
Eats rats and monkey brains
40% of Vietnamese have the same last name
Vietnamese women are the largest source of mail-order brides in the world
Vietnamese "traditional" clothing isn't traditional or even indigenous
"Vietnamese" alphabet was invented by Europeans and forced on the Vietnamese by the French
Vietnamese "calligraphy" is ugly
flickr.com
Vietnamese language is ugly
youtube.com
The epitome of Vietnamese culture is the rice hat
Traditional Vietnamese dance is a rice hat dance
MEDS. NOW. schizo
>US props up an increasing corrupt and unstable South government for decades until it becomes apparent that the South's leaders rely entirely on American handouts and the government only exists to do the bare minimum to extract donations from America
That's a nice story you've got there, except that this point is a massive non-sequitur to your preceding points.
What the Vietnam war was, was a part of a general move by America to take over the old European colonial empires from Spain/France/Britain while maintaining plausible deniability
because openly espousing colonial politics would be indefensible when America called itself "the free world"
Just like Batistian Cuba, the government in charge of South Vietnam was propped up by America solely for its servile qualities, and its sole concern was maintaining uncontested power while being known to be corrupt, all within a nominally democratic system that should have immediately voted them out. Exactly like Batista to a T. Also, just like with Castro, who was aided by the Feds/Glowies, the Feds had the Vietnamese revolutionaries' backs while they were being useful for evicting the French, and turned on them when the Viets went "colonial mastah is gone, we independent nao". The Feds didn't like that one bit, they wanted the Vietnamese to get back in line.
Anyway, the whole "Communist North Vietnam did it" thing is blown out of the water by the existence of the Vietcong, evidenced by how the US Army resorted to literal Nazi SS tactics of burning down villages and machinegunning civilians to send a message to the region that supporting the Vietcong is punishable by death without trial regardless if you're guilty or not. Such actions are, as we know, done by forces with "full, unwavering support of the populace".
Fucking clowns.
At least stop debasing yourself on top of having lost by living in a lie, and insulting the victors and survivors by perpetuating that lie internationally.
Boomers...
bump
good post
Right but the point is that for the North, overruning the South was for all intents and purposes a trivial endeavor. The South had no functional military (or state apparatus) to speak of.
The challenge of the US was twofold: to hold the North back and to develop the capabilities of the South. Holding the North back was a military objective which they were unequivocally successful in. Developing the South was a political and diplomatic objective outside of the purview of the military. In this the US failed utterly, though not in the least due to any action by the North. This went on until the political side realized their objective was untenable and abandoned their goal, relieving the military of its goal in the process.
This is where the misunderstandings come in. The Global South loves to pitch Vietnam as an american military failure because "if it bleeds we can kill it" but the truth is that it was a diplomatic and political failure. Failing to understand that, and the ready belief in the fallibility of the US military even within the US has led to decades of US foreign policy repeating the mistakes they made in Vietnam elsewhere. They repeated it in Iraq and in Afghanistan. All of these are policy failures, where the military succeeded on the battlefield at a tactical level within the scope it was committed to, but failed overall because it was tasked with unachievable political objectives outside the capabilities of the military.
Does this make sense? The issue isn't so much that the military didn't fail. The issue is that the politicians and diplomats did fail, but by billing the war as a military failure we don't hold the politicians accountable, the politicians don't learn from their mistakes and the politicians repeat those mistakes and continue to blame the military for it. These have tangible consequences on policy, because most of the people in charge in the US today grew up learning and believing these buck-passing narratives.
Your posts are propaganda by boomers with a chip on their shoulder for never having lived up to the Silent and Greatest Generation standards.
Boomers want Vietnam to be like WW2, and Yugoslavia like Korea. Millennials want Iraq/Afghanistan to be like WW2. They want something righteous, something that is both a success and an undisputed good.
Kennedy, a veteran of WW2 btw., wanted to disband the CIA and, if it were within his power (which, for being civilized, it was not), do even worse. Why? The Bay of Pigs scandal.
Know what happened there?
It was a microcosm of what happened in Vietnam and Afghanistan, 10-20 years of asymmetrical attrition warfare condensed into about a month of political plotting, 72 hours of total military chaos, and failed publicity damage control afterwards.
And what happened in the Bay of Pigs that was the same as in Vietnam and Afghanistan?
Military intelligence and the CIA tried to pin the blame on the politicians, although it was a Mil-Int / CIA fuckup from the beginning.
Kennedy specifically asked, on record
ok, so we're going to use plausible-deniability Cuban refugees to attempt to overthrow an entire country... Do we have the local population's backing on this?
CIA chief for Cuban operations: I, uh, cannot say anything specific, but we're quite sure something will happen
Yes, what happened was that locals immediately alerted the cuban military that some assholes are making a military landing on their beach. Once the beach was besieged by local government forces, Kennedy did the only reasonable thing: he ordered US warships out of the area and hoped dearly that Cuban troops would kill everyone there... which they didn't, they interrogated them instead.
The CIA tricked its own government into attempting a coup without popular backing, for its own CIA motives and to no benefit of the USA (Castro didn't pivot to full communism until a military alliance became an existential need for Cuba), and blamed the President
literally who
it is this guy from Karate Kid
The same portion of the public that deepthroats the US expeditionary forces that go around the globe bombing random countries for geopolitical purposes
pressuring Communist China via Vietnam, until the trade deal and turning China against the USSR made the point moot
Securing ore mines in former Yugoslavia and destorying a dominant regional power
Securing oil fields in Iraq and destroting a dominant regional power
Destabilizing a region and stalling Chinese economic expansion in the area
that same portion of the public fails to understand that some nation somewhere chating "we want FREEDOM! DOWN with the government!" does not equate to desiring American domination.
Independence =/= US companies getting exclusive, tax-free minung rights and Waahington-enforced fag parades.
The people of Vietnam would probably have wanted something other than communism, but America made communism a preferable choice. The people of Iraq only wanted Saddam gone, and the Iraqi army actually moved out of the way mostly, only the political fanatic brigades kept fighting until the end, and they were not mechanized, but Iraq didn't want liberalism (cue the rise of Islamic terrorism that was previously non-existent in the area). The people of Afghanistan were on board with removing the Taliban, they didn't want literal towelheads dictating to them how to live, but the US-backed government could literally only exist by turning a blind eye to how its enforcers were promoting the production of drugs and child rape, and eventually the regular army of Afghanistan made the collective decision to not fight the Taliban as they re-took the country that America spent 20 years occupying.
20 years of occupation to do what? Delay the construction of a railway that will improve the economic conditions of millions? Everything based on the lie that the local people want freedom (from their current government), which must mean they want Fed-style liberalism (which really means something else)
Shovels
bump