Would not at least a partial occupation of the north made sense?
2006-12-22 09:50:53 · 6 answers · asked by tom b 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
actually..it had to do with our elitist, "world view" politicians....instead of projecting american power and might and right..they caved in to the radicals who are now teaching our kids in the colleges and universities of this country...at that time, we could have decimated the communist gov't in china and set them back a long ways ...instead, china is now our biggest threat to american interests in the world...did you know they control the panama canal now..??? and are furthering ties with cuba, and venezuala..??
2006-12-22 10:01:15 · answer #1 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
moot People that claim the US would have won, if it had invaded North Viet Nam, ignore the very real reasons the US could not invade North Viet Nam. They basically are imagining a conflict in which the US would take out the North's forces , which it could do, and leave the Viet Cong as the only real resistance to the US. This is based on the very real facts that the guerrilla war, like all guerrilla wars can't be won without regular troops and a base from which to operate. As long as the US would have been willing to continue to prop up the Southern regime, the cong would have been free to kill and slaughter the countryside, but could never have taken the country. At most guerrillas can obtain a result of chaos, they can never win, they can merely prevent the other side from winning. The US could have just supplied air support and ended most resistance to the war at home. What these views ignore is the very real objections of the Soviet Union and China to the US invading North Viet Nam. One has only to look to Korea for a possible scenario.
2016-05-23 16:40:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Another good question:
Well, the North Vietnamese were determined and very solid as to the goals of the war.
They were veterans of WWII and had defeated the French.
We could have "won" but the cost would have been unbearable as the British Royal Navy said: "What is the butcher's bill".
We tried to bomb them and eventually we did more at the end: joke is they knew we had "lost", they "quit, waited two years and then had the whole enchillata.
Simple reasoning.
JD
PS
the Vietnamese hated then and still hatethe Chinese, whom they have fought.
2006-12-22 13:07:38 · answer #3 · answered by cruisingyeti 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It probably had someting to do with the millions of Chinese, and Russian troops that were in the North.
2006-12-22 09:53:48 · answer #4 · answered by lvillejj 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No it would have involved China in the war and led to world war3.
2006-12-22 09:53:24 · answer #5 · answered by October 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because it would upset all the hippies
2006-12-22 10:00:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋