whats your opinion? personnaly i think we just left
2007-06-23 16:14:14 · 12 answers · asked by jlspyderi 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
We won in Vietnam from a military standpoint. The Tet Offensive was the last ditch effort by North Vietnam to win and we clobbered them. But then we snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and did a cut and run. We lost on the home front thanks to people like Jane Fonda and John Kerry.
2007-06-23 20:07:56 · answer #1 · answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends on your definition of win.
We didn't accomplish our objective: to turn Vietnam into a democracy.
However, we were probably winning when we left. The Tet offensive, the massive violent push on the part of the Viet Cong near the end of the war, was a miserable failure for them. We held off what may have been their last push, with relative ease. However, the people back home, already disheartened by the social turmoil caused by a selective war that had taken so many lives, saw the bloodshed of this last desperate offensive, and concluded that we could never win, while we, in fact, were probably winning.
2007-06-23 23:20:24 · answer #2 · answered by James W 1 · 4⤊ 1⤋
We were were winning.
Walter Cronkite declared the war lost after the massive defeat of the VC/NVA (TET 68).
I think it was late 73 or early 74 when Congress cut off all aid to RVN.
1974 The North had rebuilt their military
4/75 It's all over
Go to the link
2007-06-23 23:57:17 · answer #3 · answered by Stand-up philosopher. It's good to be the King 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nixon was bombing the bejesus out of the north , and there leader said that they were close to giving up. Then Hanoi Jane and all of the other hippies turned the American public against the war. We also had parts of viet-Nam that we could not attack because of the fear of killing a Russian adviser. In short, we never brought the whole might of the U>S> military to bare on the north. If we had, it would have been a different outcome.
2007-06-23 23:27:25 · answer #4 · answered by out for justice. 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The USA was beaten by a peasant army who were prepared to take more casualties than the invaders and were better equipped for low tech warfare in a hostile environment
2007-06-24 02:02:35 · answer #5 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a dog fights a cat over a piece of meat.both of them fight fiercely.dogs got bitten,scratched and lost a couple of teeth.the cat also got severely injured.it lost an eye, got slice on the forehead and broke its hind leg.it appears that the cat injuries are worser than the dogs although it also inflicts some damage to the dog.after 30 minutes of fighting the dog ran away yelping leaving that piece of meat to the cat.
who is the winner?the cat who got beaten very bad (well u know cat vs dog, dogs are bigger than cats and of course stronger) or the dog who ran away because the cat manage to fights back?
2007-06-24 03:21:13 · answer #6 · answered by der Bomber 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since the objective was to prevent the whole of Vietnam turning into a socialist state, and to get rid of the Northern gouvernment I would say you lost.
2007-06-23 23:27:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
the liberals cut the funding for the war and we left
2007-06-23 23:26:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
WE got SPANKED so we left. We got spanked do to the Governments management of the war, basically they tied our hands around our B_A_L_LS.
Vet-USAF 44MMS / Dad flew in and out of Nam. from 67-70
2007-06-23 23:26:38 · answer #9 · answered by ฉันรักเบ้า 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
We could not extinguish the threat we were fighting. We left without finishing the job. That translates into retreat. That translates into losing.
2007-06-23 23:18:59 · answer #10 · answered by Teaholic 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋