After a terrible beating from Vietnam we once again attacked another country in the false name of Freedom. We died 35 years ago and we die today. Shameful.
2006-10-08 18:10:46 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Iraq and Viet Nam are a lot different.
If we didn't stop communism in Viet Nam, we would have wound up fighting it here in America (for those of you not old enough to remember, that was the reasoning).
But, if we don't stop terrorism in Iraq, we will wind up fighting it here in America.
Do you see the difference?
2006-10-08 18:14:23 · answer #1 · answered by imnogeniusbutt 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
so a ways as i've got widespread with reference to the Vietnamese background, if the u.s. did not give up the conflict, maybe they might won yet with a extreme cost. To maximum of Vietnamese, this conflict isn't an ideologic conflict yet a conflict to guard their place of commencing place. interior the previous, they dared to burn their capital to give up the Mongols, the chinese language. Their ancestor even stated till the foreigner ought to kill each and every of the Vietnamese, they could occupy the land. So in my view, if the united stateswished to proceed to enhance the conflict, they had 2 recommendations to win: use the atomic bomb to wreck the full North to kill Communism, then they could replace into the enemy of all mankind, or used each and every of the full source of militia interior the conflict and weakened themselves, the result could be even the cave in of the u . s . a ., not the U.S.. thankfully, the american and human beings around the area who love peace saved the government from that representation by using protesting, subsequently the united stateswithdrew, we nevertheless have a effective US at present or perhaps a non violent coming up Vietnam :)
2016-11-27 02:01:27 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ultimately Vietnam was not such a failure. We may have lost the battle but won the war. Communism fell under the REagan Administration and the blood we shed in Vietnam had a hand in that ultimate victory.
The only similarities I see between these two conflicts is the kind of enemies we are fighting. Cowardous Guerillas who haphazardly place innocent civilians in harms way as human shields, then blame us for their deaths.
Also public opinion is similar. Weak Willed Liberals spread their poison much like "Tokyo Rose" and her propeganda in WWII.
America doesn't have the stomach to do what needs to be done to fight terrorism.
We loose men unnecessarily due to concern for International opinion and Political Correctness.
Just look at the effectiveness of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and you'll see what must be done.
2006-10-08 18:58:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are going to have to change your name to idiot. Here is the lesson we learned from Vietnam. Never start a war unless you plan on winning as quickly and overwhelmingly as you can. Which means we shouldn't fight wars with cowardly, liberal democrats as commanders in chief. Nixon ended the war with a sense of honor.
to conservat..you are the idiot. You blame America for getting us into the war on terrorism. How about blaming the 14 hijackers who killed 3000 Americans on Sept 11, 2001. And don't give me that bin Laden is in Afghanistan not Iraq crap. Terrorist don't respect borders dip ****. They sure didn't respect ours on Sep 11th
2006-10-08 18:46:48 · answer #4 · answered by mk_matson 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is it because they have the IQ of a concrete slab? I hope the sand gets in their eyes in Afghanistan and blinds their asses. At least the ones that believe they are there for the reasons their governments proposed to them. If they want to leave, they should. Although it's hard because of all the followers in the squadron might hunt them down... No one can fight one on one. They have to fight in groups to feel powerful.
2006-10-09 08:44:53 · answer #5 · answered by the_breeders_cup 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess you didn't realize how hypocritical your question was, did you?
Are you not aware that the general in charge of the north Vietnam army said they were ready to surrender years before the war ended, but found the strength to continue in watching the protests to the war in the U.S.?
I think it is shame full that thousands more of our soldiers are killed because of a few liberal protesters think they know what is going on in the world.
2006-10-08 18:39:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Consider this--George W's chief foreign policy advisor is the same person who was Secretary of State during the Vietnam War--Henry Kissinger. Then you throw in Rummskull's advice and whammo---we are where we are today--Fubar'd on all fronts.
2006-10-08 18:18:42 · answer #7 · answered by scottyurb 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Here are two reasons why...
It's NOT about a "war on terror" or "fighting for freedoms". It's REALLY all about THIS!...
http://www.strayreality.com/Lanis_Strayreality/iraq.htm
Also, THIS secret and evil group has been in control of everything for far too long!...
http://www.rense.com/general58/suspre.htm
So, these are your two reasons why...
2006-10-09 04:16:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Think about it. The same people who got us into this dumb war NEVER SERVED in Nam, so they don't know what the lessons were from Nam because they made sure they didn't have to fight. http://www.nhgazette.com/news/chickenhawks/politicans_platoon/
TO IMNOGENIU: We didn't stop communism in Nam idiot. And guess what? Nam is a communist country and last time I checked Communism is all but dead. You sir are an idiot.
2006-10-08 18:15:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
Not worth an educated answer. So wobble dobble is the answer I give you.
2006-10-08 18:51:28 · answer #10 · answered by burny 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋