When will Americans accept that they lost?

Because we didnt, we abondoned objective. I don't see NVA coming anywhere close to US soil. And even if you count that as "defeat" of any sort, the so called Vietnam "War" wasn't a war but a police action so that point is moot.

When contrarianism ceases to be a part of American intellectual culture.

So never, because god doesn't love us nearly that much.

>>2777341
NVA reached strategic goal
US missed strategic goal
Yep, thats a defeat.

File: howdafuck.jpg (181KB, 1143x590px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1143x590px

>>2777341

>>2777341
>North invades south you pledged to protect
>Abandon them and watch like a cuck


Genuinely the most despicable act your country has commited, alongside funding terrorist groups and betraying your allies.

>>2777353
South deserved it, corrupt as fuck and didn't even want to win.

T.Australian.

>>2777258
What decisive battles that pushed the Americans out of South Vietnam were there?

How many divisions were destroyed?

>>2777355
You add your nationality to sound unbiased, but Australia was also in the war.


I don't deny the South was basically fascist, but betraying and backing down on promises just shows how spineless your country is.

The aussies also could've stopped the north, but backed out too.

>>2777361
Legit the south vietnamese people all wanted to join the north anyway and hated the dictator guy and the officiers were just commiting huge fraud and stealing the money meant for the troops.

>>2777349
>US reached strategic goal
>NVA missed strategic goal
>NVA waited years until the US moved on and had no significant military assets
>NVA overruns corrupt ARVN
>"haha US your previous victory never happened now!"

ftfy

You stupid shits are as bad as the wehraboos that assume 1918 never happened because 1940 did.

>>2777355
South Vietnam was just as dictatorial and corrupt as South Korea was yet you decided to protect Korea but abandoned Vietnam.
And if you look at how well SK is doing today you could have done the same to Vietnam if you had any balls

>>2777349
US accomplished its strategic goal with guaranteeing of South Vietnamese independence in Paris Peace Accords. The takeover of south happened long after US left. The fact that Washington accepted clear violation of peace treaty and didn't renew hostilities is a sad one but hardly a defeat.

>>2777365
New to the thread, but are you seriously implying that the Paris Peace Accords were anything but a U.S. withdrawal and a surreptitious green light to the NVA to come in any time they felt ready? Why the fuck did the NVA occupy about a fifth of South Vietnam at the time of the treaty?

>>2777358
What decisive battles did the Americans win in their revolution that pushed the British out? There were still over 30,000 Redcoats in and around New York. I guess the British won the American revolution, huh? No, wait, that logic is utterly retarded.

>>2777370
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/150424

>>2777370
Thats one particular way to read it.
The other would be the US fought long and hard to keep Vietnam and south east Asia from turning communist. With the result that all of Vietnam and most of south east Asia turned communist.
US completely failed to reach their goal. NVA on the other hand united Vietnam under a communist rule.
You lost. Deal with it.

File: wavewhiteflag.jpg (28KB, 500x350px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x350px

>>2777370
>US accomplished its strategic goal with guaranteeing of South Vietnamese independence in Paris Peace Accords.
Thats what we call a "French Goodbye". A sad try to safe face.

>>2777370

You signed the Paris Peace Accords knowing full well that the NVA had the intention to break them. The US failed to achieve its strategic objectives and withdrew, the NVA achieved its strategic objectives. You lost the war.

>>2777380
>and most of south east Asia turned communist
Three out of 10 countries turned communist. That's not even close to most. SEA is much bigger than Indochina.

>>2777375
>What decisive battles did the Americans win in their revolution that pushed the British out?
Yorktown. Saratoga.

>>2777358
Operation Tet was one of the the most successful operations in history of warfare, it absolutely ruined public opinion on Vietnam war in the US, which was its main goal.

>>2777875
>Operation Tet was one of the the most successful operations in history of warfare
??? There is no one on Earth, not even the fucking Vietnamese, that call the Tet Offensive a successful operation, let alone the most successful operation in the history of warfare. It completely fucking ruined NVA logistics for YEARS, completely took the VC out of the picture for the rest of the war, and actually gave SEATO MORE control over the countryside and cities than it had previously. By all rights, the Tet Offensive was a massive fucking failure that set the North's war aims back for years and made them fully realize that they absolutely could not get anything done as long as the U.S. was still in the picture.

>which was it's main goal
Now I know you're fucking larping because that was a happy accident and not the main goal at all. The main goal was to trigger a full uprising in the South which would result in the United States Dien Bien Phu. It didn't result in any uprising and it didn't result in any coup de grace either.

>>2777899
>>2777875
Also just for reference, even after Tet, U.S. public opinion while now majority against the war, didn't have THAT large of a majority. The public opinion went from 60/40 to 40/60. You don't see an actual large majority against the Vietnam War until the "invasion" of Cambodia.

>US lost the war.
>While Vietnam is sucking its (US) economic dick and making jackets for Americans and not their own people.
Really makes you thnk.

>>2777844
>Yorktown. Saratoga.
Neither battle pushed the Brits out. The Brits still had more men in America than the Continental army even after Yorktown.

Try again, idiot.

>>2777948
>Neither battle pushed the Brits out
???
Yorktown directly caused the Treaty of Paris, you triple nigger.

>>2777928

>Vietnam lost the war because its economy is now flourishing

hahaha jesus christ just accept that you lost you loser

>>2777375
Americans won with French intervention. Like with the NVA, they won no major battles that drove their enemy out. They were militarily unsuccessful.

Are you fucking historically illiterate? Fuck outta here.

>>2777949
nuh uh

>>2777952
>they won no major battles that drove their enemy out. They were militarily unsuccessful
Both of these are wrong.

>>2777953
Not an argument.

>>2777949
2 years after the fact, so the "directness" is a bit hard to prove. Regardless, it did NOT remove the British military presence from the U.S., even after Yorktown, the British had enormous forces occupying large segments of the 13 colonies.

File: overhead.jpg (12KB, 582x386px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 582x386px

>>2777952
I specifically brought it up to demonstrate that removing the enemy from your country is neither necessary nor necessarily sufficient for winning a war.

There is no divide between "military" success and failure and overall success and failure. War is political violence. If you get your political aims, you win. If you don't, you lose. Battlefield successes might help, but are not their own separate thing that gets to be judged on its own merit.

>>2777961
>2 years after the fact, so the "directness" is a bit hard to prove
Considering that negotiations began directly after and hostilities between the U.S. and Britain ceased, no it is not hard to prove. The only reason it took so long for the treaty fully go into effect was because of Spain being a cunt and the ratification process of the Continental Congress. You are a fucking ignorant cunt and can fuck off like the other retard.

>>2777928
>exports, an imporatant part of any successful economy is a bad thing
Read a book holy shit

>>2777258
>April 30, 1975
Because the war ended in 1973

>>2777972
>War is political violence. If you get your political aims, you win. If you don't, you lose.

Considering America's political aim was to withdraw from Vietnam, logically then doesn't that mean we won?
:^)

>>2777985
>Considering that negotiations began directly after and hostilities between the U.S. and Britain ceased, no it is not hard to prove
What are you talking about? Negotiations had been going on since well before Yorktown, and in fact almost as soon as the fighting had broken out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War#Staten_Island_Peace_Conference

>You are a fucking ignorant cunt and can fuck off like the other retard.
Pot, meet kettle. All I have stated is that even after Yorktown, there were significant British forces in the U.S. Places like Charleston, New York, Savannah, etc. remained occupied until the signing of the Treaty of Paris. Yorktown did not in fact, "push the brits out". The Brits were still there after Yorktown, and to deny that is to simply be wrong.

>>2777258
America did not lose though.
America achieved it's strategic goals and left, then the north invaded again after the US left.
The US was unable to redeploy because the elected officials did not want to commit political suicide to save a tiny corrupt nation.
I know people feel the need to bring the US down a peg and it's pretty funny to watch how they desperately cling to "dirt" farmers beating the US, ignoring the fact the dirt farmers were losing well backed up by all their neighbors, and the USSR. They had massive advantages and were still being beat the fuck down.

File: Paris_Peace_Accords_Approximate_Cease_Fire_Lines.png (226KB, 300x403px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 300x403px

>>2778219

>ITT burgers brandishing their excuses

>>2777906

Yeah, that Cambodia Campaign, the goal was to destroy VietCong units, who everyone claims were destroyed after Tet offensive. Cambodia Campaign was a failure IMHO. Same Vietcong unit (VC 3rd, 7th, 9th divisions) participated in this campaign, popped up, captured Phuoc Long. It was the very important first battle of 1975 Spring Offensive, which caused the collapse of Republic of Vietnam.

>>2778278
The simple fact that you use divisions goes to show they were NVA units and not VC ones which was the reality after Tet. The VC ceased to exist as an entity after Tet and all operations from that point forward were carried out by the NVA. I don't know why you're trying to dispute that. It's commonly recognized historiography by everyone including the Vietnamese.

>>2778278
>he can't tell the difference between NVA and VC

Grown-ups are talking.

Get back to arguing over whether mayonnaise is white.

File: CIYvAwHWIAAqLZH.png (248KB, 418x457px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 418x457px

Did the French lose wwi because they were invaded in 1940 when Hitler through out the treaty of Versailles?

>>2778339
There's only one country that won WWI and it got its comeuppance in '29.

>>2778312

Read history of the Vietcong, they were always organised in division. These units had long history from 1965, 1966.

>It's commonly recognized historiography by everyone including the Vietnamese.

Not known by me. Please cite Vietnamese source. I can read Vietnamese. NVA added anti-air and and artillery battalions to this unit, for conventional war, but the core infantry battalion are the same. From US source (ex. Peter Brush), they said 1/3 are northern.

>>2777370
>The takeover of south happened long after US left.
Two years.

>>2778312

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1cig3PDeQ0

Here you see Vietcong fought in regiment size. Every Vietnamese guys interview in this video are Southern. The interviewed guy at 7:50 still live in the village after all these years next to the battle ground.

>>2778219

War isn't over until both sides say it is.

Leaving while you know that the other side will continue to fight, is giving up.

>>2778345
Most of the Europe was hit harder by the depression than the US tho...

File: tenor.gif (395KB, 474x288px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 474x288px

>>2778441
This tbqh, US is quitters.

>>2777258
At least the U.S. fought.Not like any of you Eurofags fight anymore.You probably would have done a shittier job than the U.S.

>>2777361
Nothing more pathetic than the straw grasping of anti-Americans

File: a5g6837387.png (20KB, 396x270px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 396x270px

nice k/d ratio, commies.

>>2780002
>trusting US commanders body """counts"""

Americans are consistently terrible at conducting analyses of enemy casualties, even worse than the Brits and Germans.

>>2780017
those aren't estimates of enemy casualties.

" NVA casualty data was provided by North Vietnam in a press release to Agence France Presse (AFP) on April 3, 1995, on the 20th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War. "

http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html

>>2778780
Except they wouldn't have because countries like the UK or Germany had actual strategies for counter-insurgency operations. Granted, most of them revolved around terrorizing the civilian population into not wanting to support insurgents at all, but at least they had strategies whereas the US went full retard and talked about "hearts and minds" while napalming the fuck out of anything that moved.

The message was just too contradictory. Nazis were like "don't support the commie rebels or we'll fuck you up even harder" while Americans were like "we want to help your country even though we've killed half your family but just trust us on this one guys"

Guys you're forgetting the truly EPIC kill count!

We killed like 10 zipperheads to every 1 US Army soldier who was killed, so we actually won!

>>2780038
>what is CORDS
>what is the VC getting extirpated in between 1969 and 1971

>>2780026
Well then those NVA fucks fucked up, 1 million dead and only 600k wounded? I'm not buying that for a second.

But even based on that figure, the NVA/VC forces inflicted more casualties than they received.

>>2780048
The PAVN/PLAF never won a SINGLE battle against American Forces.

Do you think it was just a coincidence that the Tet offensive in '68 utterly failed and resulted in the complete dissolution of the Viet Cong?

Do you think it was just a coincidence that the PLAF launched a full-scale offensive AFTER the US backed out after signing the peace accords?

>>2780058
>implying the NVA or VC had the infrastructure to treat their wounded

Are you stupid or something?

>>2780058
I think you're doing your math wrong, bud.

>>2780082
Explain >>2778238 and how the NVA managed to be occupying significant chunks of South Vietnam even with the invincible U.S. forces around.

>>2780095
>Ignoring South Vietnamese casualties.

Intelligent Americans do. And we got our revenge for Vietnam when we supplied the mujhadeen in Afghanistan and gave the Soviets a taste of their own medicine.

I fucking love how leftists were silent during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan yet demonized the Big Bad USA for South Vietnam.

File: 629409d4c2d0c9e74de652b029c2c12b.jpg (102KB, 624x828px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 624x828px

>>2780111
That map is fake. Pic related is the actual photo, its a map of corps tactical zones.

>>2780111
Dude, if you go down on that website you can find casualty amounts per year.

NVA/VC, 1966-1972: 655,434 KIA
ARVN/US, 1966-1972: 188,452 KIA

>>2777368

Hippies didn't exist in the 50s, if they did the whole peninsula would belong to fat boy kim.

>>2780048
>American casualty claims
>credible

choose one, my dear burger friend.

>>2780082

Just myth!

Lost Battles of the Vietnam War
http://www.g2mil.com/lost_vietnam.htm

The Significance Of Local Communist Forces In Post-Tet Vietnam
https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/Vietnam/pbsignif.html

>>2780002

If attrition losses are important, the USA lost over 3600 fixed-wing aircraft in Vietnam, while the North Vietnamese lost only around 200, so who won the air war?

americans cant handle banter
or win against vietcong

US doctrine is based around air superiority. Half of built F-105 was lost in Vietnam. Attrition warfare sux.

USSR doctrine worked fine, see 1975 spring offensive. Multi corps size mechanized troops with anti-air/artillery support trumped over superior nr of enemy (4x) in 55 days.

File: 51--+aaMdtL.jpg (49KB, 304x500px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 304x500px

>Weise instructed Major Warren, his S3, to remain in Dai Do and take charge of the perimeter manned by the remnants of E and H Companies. Their other decimated company, B/1/ 3, was to remain in An Lac to secure the medevac and resupply points on the Bo Dieu River. The only elements still capable of mounting the assault were F and G Companies, and Weise planned to use both. Weise planned to accompany Golf Company. There were fifty-four Marines left in Golf, and as Weise saddled up with them he noted that, with the exception of grenadiers and machine gunners, almost all were carrying AK-47s. Weise saw only one M16; it was carried by Captain Vargas. The only other functioning M16 was carried by Weise himself.

>>2778441
Really?
Paris peace accords directly oppose your statement
North, South, and the US all signed it.
The north violated it later and the US could not legally intervene due to shifts in the laws and government.
So yes the US won their objective in the war.
Or does this not count as victory or peace to you?

File: 1492455946562.jpg (55KB, 258x360px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 258x360px

>>2781883
tfw soldiers were too stupid or lazy to clean the M16's

>>2781832
The Viets only had around 200 aircraft to begin with, most of them old MiG-17s and Mig-21s. The 3600 aircraft lost by the US were mostly brought down by SAMs—which the Viets also ran out of by the end of the engagement lol.

>>2781823
>claims Ap Bac as a "lost battle"
>conveniently doesn't mention the only ground troops were ARVN and not US

Give me a fuckin break.

File: never ever.jpg (106KB, 322x633px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 322x633px

>>2777258
Never ever, in fact it would be ACADEMICALLY CONTRARIAN to claim that the US DID NOT LOSE the Vietnam war

>>2782034

They never run out of SAM.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbuojuPOI&feature=youtu.be&t=166

Here they even took SAM with them down South at the end of war.

>>2782063

Which AP Bac?

This?

>Battle near Ap Bac - The U.S. Army's 9th Infantry Division operated in the marshy delta region of southern Vietnam, often with Navy river patrol boats. During a routine battalion sweep, Alpha company from the 2nd Brigade crossed an open rice paddy and encountered Viet Cong ready to fight from concrete bunkers. Most of the company was wiped out in the first five minutes, and rest pinned down in the kill zone for hours until other companies arrived. This battle left 40 American dead and 140 wounded.

>>2782110
No, I'm talking about the first one on that website - In January 1963. There were only South Vietnamese forces in that area.

>>2777363
>Legit the south vietnamese people all wanted to join the north anyway
Yeah. They wanted to join the North so badly that everyone that could leave before South Vietnam collapsed did so at their first opportunity.

File: america26.png (1MB, 1592x1136px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1592x1136px

really gets the noggin joggin'

File: america40.png (9KB, 250x384px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 250x384px

>>2783846
and the neurons jumpin'

File: america54.png (307KB, 604x603px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 604x603px

>>2783850
and the electrons flarin'

>>2783846
>outdated weapons
That's a meme that really needs to die

File: but but we won and got bored of it.png (252KB, 500x403px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 500x403px

>>2783846
post more of these pls

File: americanam.jpg (380KB, 664x720px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 664x720px

>>2783857
and the synapses spinnin'

File: amerishoots3.png (17KB, 488x298px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 488x298px

>>2783866
and the brains bubblin'

File: 463.jpg (267KB, 800x560px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 800x560px

>>2783857
solid kek, thanks for sharing

oh god, not another board taken over by edgy teens with their shitty history memes

what did the north really gain by taking over the south, aside from clay?

genuinely curious. had the north/south Vietnamese turned into something similar to n/s korea had they decided not to invade? or would north Vietnam end up like it does today

>>2777341
i love this damage control
more please

>>2784201

You didn't know the real leader of North Vietnam, Le Duan, was from the South? He wanted his homeland back at all cost. Other leader from the North wanted diplomacy to build socialism first in the North. "Southerners" fraction wins the power over "Northerners" within politburo.

You probably didn't know many people fleeing South to North in 1954. Many of those people traveled back to South along the trails to join Vietcong/NLF.

It's the same for other side. Many leaders of South Vietnam were from the North. Their mistake was not to push to conquer North Vietnam by force. Else they will get support of millions nationalists. 2 Vietnam's is not acceptable for most Vietnamese.

File: IMG_4528.jpg (840KB, 1350x1013px) Image search: [Google]

840KB, 1350x1013px

Alright, you wanna talk turkey and get a definite answer to this shit? The US (of which I am a flag waving citizen) lost the Vietnam War. The goal was to keep the communists out and uphold the policy of containment. We failed that goal and became disillusioned with the whole endeavor, promptly withdrawing when public support soured and the homefront going to hell in a hand basket. Did we kill the enemy? Hell yes we did, but body count is only one facet of a military victory. Vietnam was a debacle, a black mark on my nation's history. Make fun of us all you want, but don't think for a second no country is without faults. For me the war was taught as a failure, a defeat. We lost, but we learned, adapted, and strived to never let it happen again. And don't you dare mock our war dead, these men gave their lives, a sacrifice many aren't willing to make. Learn from our mistake, better yourselves for it, and honor those who serve in defense of YOU.

File: pvoJ2Vz.jpg (189KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1920x1080px

>>2786553
Fuck your dead, I'm glad they died. They did alot of messed up shit like killing and raping locals. Devegatating and destroying forests and wildlife so they can have an easier shot at the war they were losing, bombing civilian infrastructure, targeting cities and civilians, using terrorizing tactics. I'm glad the Vietcongs and NVA turned alot of them into fertilizers in return of all the agent orange and chemical weapons use.

>>2786553
It's hard to sympathize with people who get out their way and life to fly halfway around the globe toting a gun at someone's turf and killing him over politics.

And don't tell me some draft bullshit. Not all the US army was draftees.

>>2787944
>Soldiers pick the wars
>Soldiers pick where they are deployed
Sure some people join to do that, but if you think it is the majority you are deluded.

File: taliban-attack.jpg (50KB, 700x415px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 700x415px

>>2786553
>never make it happen again

Say again?

>>2788011
Doesn't matter, any one who went there on his own will and got killed got what was coming for him and what he deserved. I would never willingly participate in an invasion of a foreign land over politics while screaming about freedom. There's no freedom in exterminating villages and flattening a developing country of rice farmers.

>>2787472
Don't cut yourself on that edge

>>2781832
>doing multiple strike missions everyday over hostile territory with hundreds of assets in the air
>battling against a new threat that there were few known counters to at the time (SAMs)
>enemy air force barely flies because nearly every time they do they get their shit smacked in
>despite heavy aircraft losses to SAMs USA still rules the skies and bombs with near impunity
>"North Vietnam totally won the air war guys"

>>2789667
>losing thousands of aircraft, THOUSANDS in single operations to a loosely string-tied military only because it has SAM missiles

Why isn't the Vietnam war a textbook example of a failure in air operations again?

>>2777258
Hopefully never, it's too fucking funny to see the mental gymnastics
I mean it's the first goddamn post! >>2777341

>>2777258
Lost to what? The north vietnamese military? Never, because that never happened. The US withdrew from vietnam because of a bunch of angry hippies starting shit back home.

File: b9f[1].jpg_large.jpg (39KB, 600x448px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x448px

>>2789731
War is not only a contest of material strength, it's also a battle of wills.
Your will faltered.

>>2789703
Because the air operations didn't fail and were the reason for most of our successes on the ground? I won't deny that the US made some mistakes but our air units were against a new technology that had very few effective counters at the time. I'm sure if it was any other country flying over Vietnam in the same numbers it would have been a similar result.

>Americans lose thousands of aircraft in the Pacific, THOUSANDS in a single theater against a small island nation with a shitty industrial base

Why isn't the Pacific theater a textbook example of failure in air operations again?

File: 68747470733a2f2f73332e616d617a6f6e6177732e636f6d2f776174747061642d6d656469612d736572766963652f53746f7279496d6167652f4a4b344b46576e5f6351554c6a773d3d2d3232323731393538382e313433346533346463356165373433312e6a7067.jpg (73KB, 1280x1241px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1280x1241px

>>2777349
Defeat implies that the US lost in some way. USA wanted to stop Vietnam from going red and eventually realized that it would require way too much effort and wasn't worth that level of effort. The only reason North Vietnam was able to take South Vietnam was literally because the US stopped giving a shit

>>2789782
>burger tryharding an argument

>>2777258

Lost what?

>>2789829
>make a shitty argument
>get BTFO
>Lel stop tryharding and making me look dumb

>>2790583
>trying to argue with contrarian spergs

>>2777258
I've always accepted that the USA lost the vietnam war?

The only people that don't sound like bitter confederates during reconstruction lol

File: loser.gif (2MB, 500x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x240px

>>2789810
Yes, thats what is called giving up, one of the classic ways how to lose a war.

>>2780126
Which leftists are you even referring to?

>>2790635
Maybe you could point out exactly what the US lost then? If a country is able to remove itself from a war with no repercussions then I would not call that a loss in any sense of the word

File: 1447416965614.jpg (76KB, 249x301px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 249x301px

>>2790708
it is a loss you dip
in every sense of the word

>>2783871
>Believing communists victory claims

File: Hiroshima_versus_Detroit.jpg (157KB, 800x560px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 800x560px

when will americans accept that they lost?

>>2780111
That's not supposed to show occupation but zones of activity

>>2777258
USA cant lose a war they didnt declare

>>2777341
T. John McCain

>>2789810
>we didn't lose, we just gave up on winning

>>2792166
When the japs admit their war crimes

>>2782003
M16 was a fairly unreliable weapon and jammed a lot, kind of like a contemporary chauchat. Soldiers picked up AKs (despite their harder recoil control) due to their efficiency, not because they couldn't clean them.

File: Burgers be like we didn't loes.png (148KB, 802x554px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 802x554px

>>2792142
>As opposed to believing anything America says about its wars

>>2790708
Dignity

File: indochina_map1.jpg (41KB, 472x358px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 472x358px

>>2790708
Significant parts of Indochina amongst other things.

>>2792969
The US never owned any part of Indochina hence why it isn't a loss

>>2792085
>>2792166

>>2793030
>The US never owned any part of Indochina
Yes, because they failed at conquering it, which was the Vietnam war about.

>send 500'000 soldiers to invade foreign country
>get btfo by a bunch rice farmers with antiquated soviet gear

>>2793076
> Send in the military to stop Vietnam from going red
> Realize that fighting a guerrilla war in a massive jungle is a bad idea
> Decide to leave since it's not really worth the effort
> Decades later some anon thinks you were trying to annex Vietnam like from the Watchmen movie

>>2793105
Son, this must be hard for you now, but scholars agree that the Vietnam war was a massive defeat for the US and a huge victory for NVA.
Mostly because the US failed to achieve all its goals, despite investing hugely in weapons and manpower.
>yes, giving up makes you lose

>>2793126
Scholars can agree on whatever they want, but that doesn't change the fact that deciding a war is not worth your time is not a loss. SOUTH VIETNAM lost the war, America simply stopped giving a shit and left them to their fate

>>2793145
Son, you being in chauvinistic denial and having a hard time at puberty doesn't change the fact that the US lost the Vietnam war.
Every history book will tell you so. Deal with it.

>LOL WE BEAT AMERICA
They could have nuked you back to the Stone Age in 5 seconds and didn't.

>>2793185
> Some anon doesn't know the NVA and some elements of the Vietcong were supplied by China and USSR
> Not realizing that because of this support the oldest equipment they had to use was from WW2 and even that was rare
> Not realizing they received AAA from USSR and training on how to use it
> STILL not realizing that America literally decided the war wasn't worth their time anymore and left.


The fact that North Vietnam was powerless to do anything when America simply decided to leave the war shows you just how strong they were

>>2793145
By that logic, the British didn't lose the American revolution.

>>2793220
They did lose the revolution because unlike with Vietnam they were actively forced off of American land and despite wanting to reconquer America they did not have the force projection necessary to retake it.

File: The ride never ends.gif (205KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 500x500px

>>2793233

>>2793233
Well America was forced to leave Vietnam after 10 years of trying hard and 53'000 killed burgers because they did not have the force projection to take it.

>>2793233
>They did lose the revolution because unlike with Vietnam they were actively forced off of American land

But they weren't. Places like New York, the provisional capital of the 13 colonies, remained under massive British occupation until they left by treaty.

>they did not have the force projection necessary to retake it.
Of course they did. They sent close to 50,000 troops over, and could continue to do so if they wanted. They merely decided that the expense and trouble wasn't worth the colonies themselves, so decided not to, same as America deciding the expense and trouble of propping up South Vietnam wasn't worth it.

File: 1489059181763.png (22KB, 611x560px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 611x560px

>>2793211
>decided it wasn't worth their time

Damn i must have activated my parallel-universe Generator again. In my timeline the USA was unable to stomach the costs any longer and had to abandoned the Gold standard due to Vietnam. Massive social unrest and a degrading military (drug use,deserters etc.) also were quite important.

File: 1494441528906.png (132KB, 396x385px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 396x385px

>>2793242
I know, people can't seem to accept facts and want to endlessly spew this narrative that the US lost the Vietnam war

>>2793251
No, America chose to leave Vietnam because the military commitment necessary to secure Vietnam was not worth it. America is the world's most experienced nation when it comes to amphibious landings and they posses the largest fleet in the world so force projection was not an issue. As another anon pointed out America also had the nuclear option but chose not to use it.

>>2793259
Not true in any sense, while New York was still under British Control they did not have the force projection necessary to safely land more armies there and New York itself did not have the logistical capability to house multiple armies and permit enough supplies to be moved to them all.

File: anothervietnam2-15.jpg (553KB, 1200x1606px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 1200x1606px

>>2780058

You don't make it to medical staff when there's no infrastructure considering you are camping out in the middle of the jungle.

When you DO make it to medical tents you are in a fucking swamp full of malaria ridden mosquito and you don't tend to save many wounded.

>>2793275
>Not true in any sense, while New York was still under British Control they did not have the force projection necessary to safely land more armies there
Are you retarded? Have you ever heard of the British navy? You know, the force actually supplying their troops in New York?

>inb4 battle of chesapeake bay. Sinking a grand total of ONE ship of the line is not a death knell for the British fleet, although it did damn Yorktown.

>>2793289
If the war had dragged on I have no doubt the French fleet would've been at least able to go toe-to-toe with Britain. Besides that, Russia also wanted to see an independent America and may have provided aid with their navy had the war lasted longer

File: vietnamwar.png (181KB, 318x892px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 318x892px

>>2793242
Well, he can deny reality as long as he wants to, but he can't really change reality.
>pic reltated

>>2793329
I'm not arguing that North Vietnam lost, I'm arguing the America didn't lose but that South Vietnam did lose

>>2793275
>send half a million man and the full might of the US army to Vietnam
>get beaten to shit by rice farmers
>"chose to leave" because it is totally not worth it
Sound like total winrar lad! USA! USA! USA!

>>2793336
so by that logic, the soviet didn't lose in Afghanistan right?

>>2793343
> Thinks that phrasing the truth using strawman tactics somehow changes it

Feels good to be superior

>>2793336
America did lose, 53'000 soldiers died, they couldn't reach a single goal they had, then they weaseled out of the war because it became to expensive and they had no way to win.
giving up == losing

>>2793350
I wouldn't say they lost, but they did actually get BTFO by the mujahideen

>>2793336
You overlook the fact that America wasn't able to sustain the war at the same level.

Financially and socially. You act like the president woke up one Day and decided fuck it. In reality the war fucked up the treasury and society and they had to leave.

>>2789780
Yeah no, that's bullshit. The US withdrew from vietnam because of public outrage over the conflict, nothing the NVA or the Vietcong did had anything to do with that other then their existing and fighting. The NVA and the VC were militarily incapable, a "contest of the wills" is an irrelevant and nonsensical response to this and is also an attempt to keep a stupid troll thread going far longer then it should.

File: loser3.gif (146KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 200x200px

>>2793355

>>2793365
>other then their existing and fighting.
apparently that was enough to make the US give up and withdraw all forces from Indochina. War of attrition is a military tactic, you know?

>>2793365
>what is a state treasury

Its like you people don't want to know...>>2793366

>>2793362
wasn't any worse than Vietnam. if anything they lost fewer aircraft and soldiers.

>>2793375
Nah, the US suffered more losses in ww2 and and korea, the real problem genuinely was cultural rot brought about by hippie dumbfucks.

>>2793376
What about the treasury? Are you trying to imply that the war would have made the US go bankrupt? Because that's flat out wrong.

>>2793355
>not posting the massively higher casualties for the NVA and VC.
Nice try faggot.

>>2793343
>>gets beaten to shit by rice farmers
lol no, this is the part that didn't happen.

>Threads like this

I fucking love watching autistic burgers with the excuse books open

>>2793396

>bankrupt

There is a difference between its not affordable and Flat out going bankrupt. At some point (sooner than later) the US would have been forced to Reise taxes and that wasn't feasible because the public support for Vietnam was in step decline.

And at some point the US Economy would start to really suffer because the state is overspending on some overseas war.

The financial situation of the US wasn't as dire as the SU one in Afghanistan but the US also had enough sensible politicans to get out before shit got critical.

File: The-Wall-Header.jpg (190KB, 680x260px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 680x260px

>>2793396
>Nah, the US suffered more losses in ww2 and and korea, the real problem genuinely was cultural rot brought about by hippie dumbfucks.
Doesn't really matter, you fought 10 years, lost all public support and hence withdraw, and as a result lost the war.
The NVA on the other hand kept their ship steady, their population aligned and made it out on top.

>>2793401
no no, everything ok
>tell that to this guys

>>2793355
I doubt the 53k figure is real, I figure the estimate for american deaths in vietnam is closer to 100,000.

Hint: cold war casualty figures are never accurate. The bigger (more modern) side is going to minimize their reported casualties and exaggerate enemies, same rules apply to the soviets in afghanistan.

>>2793420

http://thevietnamwar.info/how-much-vietnam-war-cost/

Not the most scientific source but you get the idea.

>>2793420
>>There is a difference between its not affordable and Flat out going bankrupt. At some point (sooner than later) the US would have been forced to Reise taxes and that wasn't feasible because the public support for Vietnam was in step decline.
And why was the war unpopular? Because the average american no longer believed in the cause and the younger generation did not want to fight in it because of the influence of the hippie crowd.

I don't necessarily blame them for that morally, but the people in this thread like to pretend that there was something that the NVA and VC were doing or capable of doing to make the US military leave vietnam due to their opposition and that is simply false.

>>2793441
If you had some sources your ridiculously stupid idea would sound at least a little less ridiculously stupid, but then you have none.

>>2793445
They had the ability to force the americans to keep overspending by sustaining the casualties the americans inflicted.

And they had luck with Tet. Tet dealt a devastating psychological blow but that was never its foremost goal. It was intended to incite a Rebellion and that Flat out failed.

>>2793446
It doesn't have sources, it's an estimate, it's what most historians throughout history relied on to figure out these kind of things.

Obviously this is an estimate because there can't be sources because the US is the source and they obviously won't declassify real figures if they had them so they don't look militarily inept infront of the USSR. Look on the bigger picture, kid.

So the source argument doesn't hold at all.

>>2793325
>If the war had dragged on I have no doubt the French fleet would've been at least able to go toe-to-toe with Britain
Yes, we've already noted your complete ignorance in regard to how 18th century warfare worked. Do you remember how at the Saintes, the British capture more ships of the line than they lose to every single French action in the entire Revolutionary war period? Did you bother to do even as much as a quick wiki search for their ships of the line at the time period?

>Besides that, Russia also wanted to see an independent America and may have provided aid with their navy
Oooh, the RUSSIAN fleet. So scary.

>>2793455
And that ability isn't relevant because the US could very easily have been able to raise taxes to pay for the war if it weren't for the fact that the war was unpopular due to leftist agitation.

The Vietnam war was a war between North Vietnam and the USA
North Vietnam did win the War. However, USA did not lose. Why? Because I say so!

>>2793441
>>2793474
Yeah no, your asinine speculations aren't actual arguments no matter how hard you try to make them seem that way.

Besides, even if the US did suffer 100,000 casualties, the NVA and the VC still got the worse end of the deal.

>>2793474
whoops, wasn't trying to quote this post, my apologies.

>>2793457
meant to quote this guy.

>>2793431
>>doesn't matter
Yes it does matter actually, if people in this thread are claiming that the North Vietnamese actually beat the US military. That claim is wrong, flat out.

>tell that to this guys
Cute, but you might want to try telling that to the massive pile of vietnamese corpses instead. They got it worse.

>>2793497
>inferiority complex

your bias has been exposed. Step outside the thread and put your hands in the air.

>>2793516
Everyone has a bias, and objecting to idiotic bullshit posted by tedious trolls is not actually an inferiority complex.

>>2793514
No one claimed that, the North Vienamese beat the entire USA, not only its military.
They did so by grinding down the US military in a hugely expensive and ultimately unwinnable war of attrition whilst at the same time undermine and erode the US public war support. Means all US soldiers died in vain and in the end the US just quit.

>>2793529
Except North Vietnam did not do much of any grinding when you compare casualties suffered, and the US quit because of domestic opposition to the conflict.

>>2793485
>left
IS this the US variant of the Dolchstoss legend?
>fucking lefties made me lose the war

>>2793537
53k KIa and 300+k WIA is quite a bit of grinding, restisting invasion and keeping up the fight for 10 years is also quite a bit of fighting.
But then, they at least won and died for something, unless the US casualties who just died in vain.

>>2793538
Hardly a legend, given that that is precisely what happened.

>>2793547
>>quite a bit of grinding
Not compared to what the US did to them. Oh and their fighting efforts mattered much less then the people in the US who were protesting the war.

>unlike US casualties who just died in vain
I agree with this actually. We should have invaded north vietnam proper with a much larger army and razed the place to the ground. Sadly hippies and other subversives prevented that.

>>2793570
>Not compared to what the US did to them.
True, but then this is completely irrelevant for the outcome of the war. Vietnam 1 - US 0

>>2793581
I'm not denying that the US lost? I'm saying that the US lost because of hippies and other subversive elements first and foremost. And while the US soldiers who died in that conflict did so in vain as far as stopping the communist take over of the Vietnam is concerned, they likely did keep the commies from trying anything in certain other parts of southeast asia.

>>2793602
>I'm not denying that the US lost
Well ok then, we are done with this thread.

>>2793538
Who the fuck do you think was protesting the war? Since you seem clueless, have you heard of these names before?

Dan Rather
John PT Boat Kerry
Jane Hanoi Fonda
John Songbird McCain

>>2793602
Yeah, like Cambodia!

>>2793639
Or Laos

>>2793602
>Dolchstoßlegende

Lel. No you lost because the War was never winnable with the Goals you had in mind. Further escalation of means also was immposible due to political and social restrictions.

>>2793639
>>2793657
More like Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, and probably others that I'm forgetting. I know Britain conducted a successful counterinsurgency campaign in Malaysia, but if Vietnam had quickly and easily gone red then something similar probably could have spread over there as well.

>>2793658
Nope. The US could have propped up south vietnam until the north lost interest in it, but the US public no longer wanted to be involved.

>>Further escalation of means also was immposible due to political and social restrictions.
Yeah that would be the subversive elements I mentioned.

File: american-ed.jpg (21KB, 400x398px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x398px

>>2793673
>More like Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, and probably others that I'm forgetting
American "education"...

>>2793699
>>baseless and pointless insult.
And with that I'm done with this thread.

>>2793685
>subversive Element

Yeah right. Only dem smoking hippies were unwilling to use nukes or start a fullscale war against China.

>north Vietnam Loosing interest

Wtf. You completely ignore political realities. It wasn't subversive elements that ended the war. Nixon ran on the promise to find an out.

>>2793739
Son, try to find find Indonesia on a map first. Its a group of Islands on the other end of the south chinese sea. Insinuating it was saved in any way by the Vietnam war is like suggesting to invade Britain because Morocco has turned communist. Same goes for Singapore. And owhen you done working up on geography I'll try to explain you why Thailand was in no danger whatsoever.

>>2793673
this person has crippling autism

>>2793918
>Same goes for Singapore

LKY didn't think so.

>Lee Kuan Yew have argued that the U.S. intervention in Indochina, by giving the nations of ASEAN time to consolidate and engage in economic growth, prevented a wider domino effect.[19]

File: 1451360893888.jpg (107KB, 490x750px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 490x750px

They're being contrarian because people keep saying and thinking the entire US military got rekt by a couple of rice farmers with out dated small arms. People imagine a bunch of Vietnamese stylin all over the evil imperialist Americans, and call Americans pussies, while in reality the US repeatedly fucked them up hard, with the VC basically ceasing to exist.

The problem was their strategy was retarded and relied on muh k/d, just kill enough of them and they will get tired and stop. They made no effort to actually hold on to territory or systematically drive out the North Vietnamese, or even invade and dismantle North Vietnam, mostly likely fearing a repeat of the Korean War with China using it as an excuse to intervene. So their only option was keep killing until the enemy quit, which was even close to working until American media basically told the North Vietnamese that the US was losing support for the war at home, and all they had to do was just hang on and the Americans would eventually leave. So they did, the US decides fuck it, this is gonna take forever and leaves, North Vietnam rolls over South Vietnam, and 14% of the Vietnamese population had died for nothing and more had been crippled or cursed to raise malformed children, who be risking to step on a landmine or undetonated bombs, not even mentioning how the war basically brought the Khmeer Rouge into power in Cambodia.

The whole war was just the US being fucking retarded. Managed to spread communism to neighboring countries in their attempt to stop communism, and then having Vietnam curb stomp those same communists and also China which were the ones the US were worried about to begin with.

Absolute fucking retardation from start to finish.

How do you want you South East Asia? Just fuck my shit up GI.

>>2794138
Yes, because Singapore is so close to Vietnam and at the time was so endangered by communist agitation. Or maybe he just said it for politcal reasons?
Now go find Indonesia on the map, a hint, it is close to Singapore.

>>2777341
Is it true they teach this nowadays in schools there? Seems pretty horrible if that's the case.

>>2777341
Superlative semantics, Sam.

File: 1493089925872.png (185KB, 300x326px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 300x326px

>>2794326

Not that guy, but Singapore actually was having serious problems with MCP/Communist subversion and Indonesian Konfrontasi (on account of the whole Malaysian Emergency thing), and so was extremely happy to have the USA fight the communists in Vietnam to keep communism from establishing a stronger foothold in the region. Should look up the history between the PAP and the commies.

Hell, one of the primary reasons behind Singapore joining up with Malaysia in the first place was because of the massive security threat posed by the communists.

>commanders log
>hour 77 of thread "When will the Americans accept"
>the Imperialists have retreated to the position that they somewhat lost the Vietnam war but attribute this to the progressive elements within their society
>For unknown reasons the argument of successfully saving Indochina from communist rule was brought up
>Imperialists seem unimpressed by the Fall of Cambodia and Laos under communist rule
>US education and the resulting lack of geographic knowledge makes them believe Indonesia and Singapore are located in Indochina
>Further hard fights have to be expected until the total submission of the Imperialist forces

File: 1488381844533.jpg (195KB, 798x770px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 798x770px

>>2794503

>>2794503

Quit being a retard.

File: 1487817099330.jpg (193KB, 762x785px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 762x785px

>>2794503
>getting so rectumravaged that you can't even respond to the posts disagreeing with you because they're less dumb than your posts

File: implying america lost the vietnam war.png (1MB, 1104x514px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1104x514px

>They still think we lost

laughing_motorized_cart_bound_landwhales_wearing_american_flag_shirts.jiff

>>2794589
Lost the war, won the peace.

File: 1344793673620.gif (2MB, 201x145px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 201x145px

>>2794594
>tfw it was the opposite in Iraq

>>2794503
Fcking rekt

File: 1493565018375.jpg (42KB, 728x522px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 728x522px

>>2777258
Not only did we not lose, we won. All we wanted to do was give them the illusion of victory, because eventually they lost. It's called playing the long game. However, an inferior country like yours would never understand. Yours is short sighted, which is why you had such a fall from grace. Truly pathetic. Will you ever stop projecting your insecurity onto us? I relish the tears from your anti-American position of weakness

File: Have it.jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>2794503
that was a solid kek, ty m8