No Stan, the generals and admirals all knew how to prosecute the war. They simply werent allowed to do it. Had you read the accounts you would know this. It's rather obvious that your memory is selective. I dont blame the media, I blame the administration(s) that told the generals how to fight the war. Had the leaders in the field been allowed to win the war, they would have. It's not "my way". It just happens to be the way it was.
Lee On 8/17/2014 11:26 PM, (Redacted sender Sblumen123@xxxxxxx for DMARC) wrote:
LeeYou say you was there, I wasn't but I read the accounts in the news media which we don't trust. The lying news media says we were driven out, not just walked out, on helicopters helter skelter in dissaray. As a freightend GI you knew better then the Generals where to drop th napalm, agent orange and tons of regular bombs doesn't sound right to humble me? Blame the news media. Anyway have it your way, no skin off my back. Comrade B ,In a message dated 8/16/2014 11:02:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pixiehat@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:Stan, On what planet were you living during the Vietnam unpleasantry? On 8/16/2014 7:06 PM, (Redacted sender Sblumen123@xxxxxxx for DMARC) wrote:Lee Remember after the war some American Officer told a Viet Nam Officer that we really won the turning point Tiet (don't recall the spelling) offensive and the reply was yes but it is irrelevent. Sorry but I consider your analysis as irrelevent. Don't be such a big shot strategist, no one of importance after all this time says what you say. We tried like hell to win and then an honorable way out and we lost. Comrade B In a message dated 8/16/2014 9:20:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pixiehat@xxxxxxxxxxx writes: Stan, Viet Nam didnt really defeat anybody. They persevered. The war was too expensive for France to continue and they didnt consider the possible prize was worth the expense. There were a number of reasons we left (gave up). Our generals and admirals were not given the tools they needed to prosecute the "police action". The rules of engagement were stacked against "winning" from the get go. I argue that we should not have been there in the first place. It wasnt our war. However, It was a war we could have "won". All those bombs/napalm/and agent orange, were simply put in the wrong place and not in enough quantity. Of course, had we put enough resources in that theater to make a difference, China would have probably mached us bullet for bullet. I doubt the Vietnamese would have survived the war. I was there. I went to bed every night scared shitless. I'm glad we pulled out and I'm glad I managed to survive. I'm glad Vietnam survived and that the people are beginning to prosper. Hopefully they will eventually have the government that they deserve. Those in power now will continue to do a fine job untill their prosperity and that of their constituency conflict. I dont see us "re-invading". I do see them having another civil war or coup. It's a beautiful country and seven million visitors is just a tip of the ice berg. Lee On 8/16/2014 2:17 PM, (Redacted sender Sblumen123@xxxxxxx for DMARC) wrote:My dear JS Our house pseudo intellectual, using demonizing words out of thin air against a small communist country who the world respects for winning a war against a Capitalist France and USA throwing napalm, agent orange and more bombs then dropped during all of WW11. (See last paragraph below). Did a little birdie tell you or you were there or know someone who was there or what? Did you read that close to 7 million tourists visits Vietnam yearly? Did you read DR's Wikipedia and figure from that, that Vietanm is led by corrupt, vicious, deadly communist leaders who are not trying to build a better country for their people and it's future but only to make themselves rich? Perhaps we should re-invade them and be welcomed as saviors this time? Advice, don't demonize when you don't know. Think, think, think. Stanley In a message dated 8/14/2014 11:47:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, schalestock@xxxxxxxx writes: Lee, You really nailed it. I remember my dad (a ww2 vet) saying it was a civil war right from the start. And of course, those of us that were over there had no doubt about the corruption of the South Vietnam government and the ARVN. I recently watched an interesting documentary about LBJ with live videos of him talking to McNamara. It appears that he saw his conundrum as fearing the Chinese would come in if he turned us loose to go up north on one hand and fearing he would be accused of " losing" Vietnam if he did nothing. Naturally, the end result was was amicro managed cluster fuck that ended in our defeat. But it does show the consequences of electing anuneducated, self serving ignoramus who didn't even know about the thousand year old animosity between Vietnam and China. There is no doubt the Vietnamese would have fought the Chinese just as hard as they did us had China tried to come into the war. And, as you point out, capitalism has no corner on corruption. The communist regime in Vietnam is not only corrupt, its vicious and deadly to its own people. So it goes in Stan's communist Utopian fantasy world. JS ---------- Original Message ---------- From: "Lee, NI7I" <pixiehat@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Viet Nam, success or failure? Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 08:29:55 -0700 Stan, you would have a good argument if you didnt insiston inserting half truths (which are worse than lies). The US wasnt trying to impose anything on viet nam.What they were doing was interfering with a civil war. There was already a "capitalist democracy" in place in south viet nam. With our assistance it became more corrupt than it was and, again with our assistance, in failed. Now they have a "capitalist democracy" of their own making. I dont think you could really call what they have in that country communism. It's just adifferent sort of capitalism. And, from what I understand, is no less corrupt than our country. Lee NI7I On 8/13/2014 7:16 PM, (Redacted sender Sblumen123@xxxxxxx for DMARC) wrote: RR and DR and JS and etc. You say you have an open mind and you know of no socialist country that has succeeded excluding China? How about Viet Nam, isn't that a country run by communists? It was a colony of Captalist France until it won it's independence and then again when Captalist America tried to impose a Captalist Democracy on it and failed and it won the admiration of the world even by many here? Today we free trade with it and it is even a tourist destination including soldiers who fought against them. Remember the unkown Spanish author of the saying, 'A wise man changes his mind often, a fool never'. You can call me the fool but as wise men where do you stand? Comrade B ____________________________________________________________ Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it. <http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2>
