How come the Korean War is never discussed on here?

Because it isn't the Remembered War.

>>34233462
Too brootal.

I have trouble even finding good books about it.

>>34233462
Because its not over.

>>34233462
Because MacArthur was a loser faggot nobody liked but the U.S. still needed heroes.

Not as glamorous as WW2, not as controversial as Vietnam.

File: comet in korea.jpg (105KB, 800x646px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x646px

>>34233462
Nobody won, didn't have much of a cultural impact due to being to close to WW2.

Did however pitch the various tank philosophies in East vs west. so super aesthetic.

T34s & shermans Vs shermans, Walker bulldogs, cromwells, Comets & centurians.
IS2s Vs pershings Pattons & Churchills

Jets Vs props

>>34233893
Mac would have won if the president was not a gutless maggot.

>>34233900
>nobody won
>stopped the norks and chicoms from total commie takeover
Ivd say the US accomplished its mission

>>34233915
So by that metric you finally admit you lost the Vietnam War because the commies did win over the south?

>>34233927
We didn't lose. We gave up
The massive media presence stirring up anti war sentiment did more damage to the US than the commies ever did
Also
>you can't lose a police action

>>34233927

The vietcong sure did beat south veitnam.

:^)

File: 9190958.gif (1MB, 332x190px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 332x190px

>>34233938
>We didn't lose.
>We gave up

>>34233938
>We didn't lose. We gave up.
Come off it, everyone loses a war or two, learns lessons and moves on. Stop thinking you are invincible.

>>34233945
I should say "we didn't lose to the Vietnamese since we defeated ourselves"

>>34233953
Don't really care who exactly you lost to, fact is you still lost the war.

>>34233951
>>34233945

>South Vietnam falls years after the US left
>is somehow the US who lost

???

>>34233959
>American puppet falls, regardless of circumstance
Yep, America lost.

>>34233959
Failure to retaliate and take north vietnam means that defeat was inevitable.

>>34233959
>Purpose of Vietnam war was to stop the south falling to the north
>South falls to the north
>"but the US didn't lose"

???

File: yearbook-bad-5.jpg (239KB, 500x647px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 500x647px

>>34233938
>we didn't lose
>we gave up

>>34233963
Retarded logic.

>>34233969
>US was defeated when they were not even in the country

Wut.

>>34233970
>purpose of the veitnam war was to prevent the south from falling to the north.
>it never did when US was in country, they achieved a peace treaty and left
>south Vietnam failed to defend itself
>its the US loss for not bailing them out again

Wut

>>34233938
>We didn't lose. We gave up

>I didn't fail the test. I gave up
>I didn't lose the race. I gave up
>I didn't break the speed limit. I gave up

You don't happen to be the Prime Minister of Canada do you?

File: 38th_Parallel.jpg (102KB, 900x691px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 900x691px

>>34233462

Already it's become a Vietnam shitfest. Why can't people just a civil discussion on the internet for once? Just ignore the bloody trolls.

>>34233953
This. When half of the country thinks a war is good, and the other thinks it is bad, you won't be able to fully throw the war machine at the enemy.

WW1 - We had our civilians killed by a U-Boat. Most everyone at that point was for going to war against the Weimar Republic and making them wish they never attacked us. (Yeah, the ship was filled with powder and weapons, but it had civilians.)

WW2 - Pearl Harbor. Nuff said.

Korea - Not much of a catalyst for the US, short of the Best Koreans attacking and utterly demolishing the south, which was an area the US was protecting after the surrender of Nippon in dubya-dubya-two.

Vietnam - Well. There was an attack on a ship, but we'd had soldiers there ever since the French got their asses handed to them a decade prior as "advisers". We really didn't have any real reason for being there except stopping the spread of commies. Which, don't get me wrong, is a glorious goal, it is not a very achievable goal. The media landscape changed between Korea and Vietnam, too. You could see the horrors of war in your living room. People didn't like that, for obvious reasons. That, combined with the constant threat of nuclear war breaking out between the US, the Soviets, and the ChiComs, really made it difficult for the war machine to get thrown 100% into Vietnam. We had our hands in too many conflicts, both abroad and at home.

Thats how we defeated ourselves. It's the same way we've defeated ourselves in Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other shithole were in right now.

>>34233985
If you're forced to pull out, but the conflict goes on and the side you were on loses, you have lost.

Same as a football game, don't have to be on field all the time, but if you get subbed in & subbed out, you're still on the team and you still loose.

>>34234001
Does defeating yourself count as losing? Because that does mean you lost the war.

>>34234004
>forced to pull out

Never happened. The US achieved its goal of a peace treaty. There is zero reason to remain after that.

>>34233462
Cause it's a forgotten war

Didn't have any impact on mainland US and its ppl

>>34234010
you didn't have to pull out even though the conflict ended...
We had enough brains to keep troops in britain & germany.

>>34234033
>you didn't have to pull out even though the conflict ended...

We had no reason to stay. Globally veitnam was strategically unimportant, unlike Germany and Japan.

File: 200_s.gif (44KB, 294x200px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 294x200px

>>34234010
>The US achieved its goal of a peace treaty.
So wait... America went to war with a country they were legally at peace with, so they could be at peace with them?

I mean, I get the using weird measurements, I get driving automatic transmissions, I understand all those things. But I don't understand that.

>>34234038
>Vietnam
>share a border with China
>involved in dispute over south china sea where USN's 'operation freedom of navigation' take place
>>unimportant

US just BTFOed in Vietnam war

Can anyone tell me what the terms of the US surrender to Vietnam was? What US lands were attacked/taken by Vietnam?

>>34233462
Not a lot of people bought the WWII expansion pack.

>>34234058
Peace treaty between North and South veitnam.

>>34234079
China was unimportant in the 60's, a huge shithole. It was all about the USSR at the time, and they were split. The SCS was also unimportant then due to the lack of world trade in the region at the time.

>>34234008
I would say yes, it does. Our side lost the war, even if we defeated ourselves. A defeat is a defeat. As much as it pains me to say that. Best Korea is still technically at war with us, and we are still at war with them, so neither side has "won" or "lost" that one.

Iraq and Afghanistan are pretty much lost, because all the enemies have to do is wait until we leave.

>>34234010
>i don't know what happened in Vietnam after the treaty
>or faggot thinks US gov was so retarded that it believed commies will comply with the treaty and renounce reunification after US retreats.

The peace treaty was intended excuse of US for retreat desu.

>>34234136
>the peace treaty was an excuse to retreat.

>>it's a retreat if you achieve all your goals and leave

Wut

>>34233462
I guess because it always devolves into a conversation about the It Ain't Me war.

>>34234001
>Weimar Republic
>WW1

>>34234128
>Iraq and Afghanistan are pretty much lost, because all the enemies have to do is wait until we leave.
Well, the Taliban has already taken control back over parts of the country, and then there's the whole Iraq situation...

>>34234157
Fuck me. I clearly meant the Kaiserreich.
>>34234001
I feel really fucking dumb right now. I need more coffee...

>>34234171
Exactly. We can act like the puppet state we've built in Afghanistan is going to survive the inevitable US withdrawal, but it's not. Same thing in Iraq.

>>34234140
>sticked to the Domino Theory
>"hey we should stop communization of Vietnam"
>"fuck commies and fuck the nationwide referendum. We US recognized only south vietnam as sovereign nation"
>>>>>>>>war
>"we are fucked"
>"Let's not give a shit about our previous anti communization goal and just escape this horrible place.
>sign the treaty and run

The main reason is that Korea didnt have any good tunes that fueled anti war sentiment.
"It ain't me starts playing"

>>34234191
The stupidest part, is that if world leaders didn't find the idea of secession so repellent, we could have a few new countries carved out of the old ones which would've been stable. The Kurds want independence in Iraq, and I don't know if there's support for it in Afghanistan, but the Northwest is much more peaceful than the Southeast, perhaps two countries would've worked better than none.

>>34234227
A very sensible solution. Too bad our "leaders" aren't as sensible as you, anon.

>>34233938
>We didn't lose. We gave up

Delusion.

>>34234001
>When half of the country thinks a war is good, and the other thinks it is bad, you won't be able to fully throw the war machine at the enemy.

Not every war is, or needs to be, a total war.

File: IMG_2891.jpg (27KB, 512x288px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 512x288px

No movies about it.

>>34234279
Did have M.A.S.H though.

>>34234058

The rationale for Vietnam was that Communism (with a capital C) was on the march and it needed to be stopped before the balance of power shifted too far in its favor. By the 1970s communist countries were far more fragmented, and the Sino-Soviet split was fully apparent, so US-PRC relations were in some ways better than between the USSR-PRC. There was no point in resuming the Vietnam War since there was little threat of a massive communist Eurasian super-alliance.

>>34233901
You are retarded. He had no escalation options which would not have weakened the important theater of Europe. He had no land invasion options because logistics and enormous Chinese armies. Nuclear warfare wasn't worth the risk of a Soviet nuke strike. Read some history and not just /pol/ posts. Your military and historic ignorance is disgusting and you've no excuse posting from ignorance.

>vietnam
killed millions, left
>vietnam wars with china
haha
>vietnam ignored by region for 20 years
haha
>china panics as iraq with largest standing army identical in most ways to theirs collapses over 2 weeks
haha
>soviet union dissolves
l m a o

ladies and gentlemen, this is what losing a war looks like. really activating my almonds

>>34233462

because it's racist

all the videos are in B&W

>>34233927
How do you win an intentionally unwinnable battle?

The real battle in Vietnam did not take place on it's soil, but on the marble and carpet of Washington.

>>34234283
Mash was about the Vietnam War, they just pretended they were in Korea because vietnam was still going on when the show aired.

>>34233985
Holy shit, this is either God tier bait or you're a massive dumbass.

The US did not lose because of enemy superiority, they lost because of political instability at home.

We abandoned the war because doves were loud enough and common enough to give the US a problem more important on the home front than the war in Vietnam.

Yes, in combat we stomped the Vietcong, but we still failed our main objective and let the enemy complete theirs.

So in the end, they won and we lost.

>>34233938
Wrong again. The US was losing too much blood and treasure for nothing. Remember Viet Nam has no strategic value and the fall of the South demonstrated this. I defy you to articulate a valid strategic reason for involvement and escalation.

Now the Navy pays port calls to Viet Nam, Intel has a fab there, and China remains the historic enemy of Viet Nam. The people who buried nearly 60,000 G.I.s for nothing are why the war really ended, not reporters. Armed forces discipline was breaking down because of conscription and required a massive stockade/brig/jail system in theater and CONUS to function.

https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/Vietnam/heinl.html

>you can't lose a police action

Failure to achieve your objective is losing, mongtard. Idiots prefer to see war as a purely military affair because that suits their simple minds. Viet Nam knew better (hence no attacks on CONUS or other terrorist ops).

Russia know better today. Putin and friends are masters of non-linear war. Burgers want Hollywood nation-state wars with parades. Most wars historically are power adjustments, not Total War. SEA was and remains a backwater.

You can read military analysis of the Viet Nam wars by officers from David Hackworth to H.R. McMaster and decide for yourself, but your version is not considered remotely accurate in serious military scholarship circles.

>>34234210
>goal is to stop communism
>communism stopped while in country
>peace treaty signed between two nations at war
>no reason to be there, leave
>years later country falls
>us is at fault

???

>>34233943
>The vietcong sure did beat south veitnam.

No, the NVA invaded them with conventional forces years after the US withdrew. The VC were broken in Tet but certainly served their purpose.

>>34234346
>Soviet nuclear strike
>in korea
>in 1950

And yet, you tell me to read a book.

Spoilers: we were not fighting the Soviets.

>>34234406
>We abandoned the war because doves were loud enough and common enough to give the US a problem more important on the home front than the war in Vietnam.

Read how David Hackworth tubed his career in protest over how the war was misfought by military leaders. He was the ONLY US officer to put duty before career.

>>34234406
>We abandoned the war

>getting a peace treaty thus your entire reason for being there is "abandoning the war"

???

>>34234427
Soviet aid was provided the Norks including pilots and aircraft. The first Soviet nuke test was in 1949 and it wasn't known how many they had, so the risk wasn't worth taking. We now have their full testing chronology but didn't know it all then.

>>34234456
>Soviets giving migs to NK means they will give them nukes

Wew laddy.

>>34233994
you lose 100% of the wars you don't fight

>>34233462
Korea is like WWII on steroids
>same tanks but with few new ones
>air combat is the same just much fastera and with jets

>>34234508
>~50,000 dead conscript soldiers over 10 years
>We didn't even fight in that war man.

If that's not involved, i'd hate to see involved.

>>34234001
>There was an attack on a ship,

http://fair.org/media-beat-column/30-year-anniversary-tonkin-gulf-lie-launched-vietnam-war/

maybe guilt is why the left hated the vietnam war so much. they lied us into it.

>>34234540
>calling the Tonkin gulf a lie

It was not a lie, that url is 100% disingenuous.

I didn't even bother clicking the link.

>>34234529
i wasn't retorting, i was memeing along with that guy.

>>34234552
It was originally claimed by the National Security Agency that a Second Gulf of Tonkin incident occurred on August 4, 1964, as another sea battle, but instead evidence was found of "Tonkin ghosts"[7] (false radar images) and not actual North Vietnamese torpedo boats. In the 2003 documentary The Fog of War, the former United States Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara admitted that the August 2 USS Maddox attack happened with no Defense Department response, but the August 4 Gulf of Tonkin attack never happened.[8]

the first attack was not sensationalized, but the second one was, by no less than the washington post and the new york times.

it never fucking happened, but liberals made the war happen.

>>34234552
“American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New Aggression”, announced a Washington Post headline on Aug. 5, 1964.

That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: “President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and ‘certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam’ after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.”

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers — in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.

>>34234346
>Soviet nuclear strike.
>1951
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*gasps*AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*wheezes* wew lad.

>>34233462
>korean war thread
>90% of posts about vietnam

This is why the korean war is never discussed here

>>34234432
And David bashed the M16 worse than Max Brooks did.

>>34233462
>grandfather was at Chosin Reservoir
>has about five medals
>ask him about it
>literally just says he peeled potatoes the whole time and changes the subject immediately

Not even Korean Vets want to talk about Korea mate

>>34234582
The ship 100% believed it was under attack and reported as such, the Johnson admin is to blame for not following up, but there is zero proof of any kind that they knew it was not real and went ahead with it.

>>34234593
>news gets shit wrong

Holy shit stop the presses!

>>34234363
All the tech was from korea. Come on.

>>34234427
It's not that the soviets would nuke us then and there, but we would have set a dangerous precedent in the casual use of nuclear weapons, rather than their use as a deterrent.

>>34234862
Not logically. It's not as if the USSR was not going to nuke the Fulda gap if we nuked Korea, or the Israelis would not have nuked the arabs if the US did not intervene.

What that was, was a lame excuse for having no spine.

>>34234804
no shit, but the topics they were dealing with were almost entirely about vietnam and what was happening in the 1960s/70s. even their hairstyles weren't early 50s.

>>34234456
>We now have their full testing chronology but didn't know it all then.
We did.
But we couldn't tell anyone we knew because then it would reveal how much we did know.
Kennedy was elected running on a campaign that consisted partly of a claim that there was a missile gap with the Soviets. After he was elected, Eisenhower brought him in and told him the truth, we was shocked.

>>34235069
I disagree, had the US normalized the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield, the Soviets would have had a precedent to nuke us in, say Cuba or Vietnam to preserve their sovereignty as we did with Korea, which could have escalated further to an actual nuclear exchange. The use of nukes would also reveal the (relatively) mild effects nukes actually have compared to the pop culture view that they can destroy the planet, and perhaps losing that taboo.

>>34234255
>>34233994
>>34233974
>>34233951
>>34233945

lol retards theres a huge difference between losing a war and just leaving, i bet you told yourself you won fights when the alpha stopped punching you in the nose and went home.

>>34235203
>The use of nukes would also reveal the (relatively) mild effects nukes actually have compared to the pop culture view that they can destroy the planet, and perhaps losing that taboo.
that isn't a bad thing

>>34235203
>I disagree, had the US normalized the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield, the Soviets would have had a precedent to nuke us in, say Cuba or Vietnam.

Wrong, as Soviet troops were not targeted. The nuclear use would be limited to conventional defeat of US forces which is exactly the nuclear option of today for the US. it would be used against a proxy, which would mean the USSR would have used nukes during Afghanistan....and that's it.

>>34233462
We're still waiting for the sequel.

>>34233953
>we were defeated but we didn't lose
Word games like this are a psychological tell.

>>34235208
>Hey Golden State kicked Cleveland's ass in the Finals so far
>If they just forfeit the rest of their games, they still won, right?

Dumb fuck.

>>34235299
The US completed its military mission in Vietnam, which was to force an agreement that would end the conflict.
That took shape in the Paris Peace Accords.

The US failed its political commitment to support South Vietnam after the war ended.

If you actually read the history of it rather than watching Oliver Stone movies, you would understand that there were two distinct events here, that were successfully muddled together in the wake of the fall of Saigon so that it could be used as a political bludgeon in domestic US politics.

>>34234261
Every war should be total war becuase war should be the last possible outcome is diplomacy fails.

>>34235364
>join war to stop spread of communism
>Americans pull out
>South Vietnam gets invaded by the North
>Vietnam becomes a communist country

That is the definition of failing your military objectives.

>>34235364
>>The US completed its military mission in Vietnam, which was to force an agreement that would end the conflict.
That wasn't the objective in Vietnam. The objective was to stop the spread of Communism. That didn't happen. What you're proposing is a retcon invented to save face.

>>34235406
You seem to be ignorant. Let me help you.

>join war to stop spread of communism
>Force North Vietnam to agree to peace treaty
>War stops
>Americans tell South Vietnam that they will help them if they need it again.
>Americans pull out
>End


>South Vietnam gets invaded by the North
>US Congress refuses to allow US to fulfil its previous obligations.
>Vietnam becomes a communist country

It was my pleasure to educate you.

>>34235444
>The objective was to stop the spread of Communism.
Thats exactly what the Paris Peace Accords did.
After that, and the US left, North Vietnam started a new war several years later.

Again, my pleasure to educate you.

>>34235461
The spread of communism was not prevented. The Paris Peace Accords were just America's way of saving face and disassociating itself from the inevitable victory of the communists.

>>34233927
The fall of vietnam was after the official end of the war.

>>34233462

The Korean war is a "forgotten" war for us because of 2 key reasons.

First, the Korean conflict wasn't shit compared to WW II, and since the nation didn't mobilize the same way they did for WW I and II, the war could be easily ignored by those that didn't have to fight it back in the states. Much like the "wars" in Iraq and A-stan.

Second, communist infiltration of American society and government came to a head in the 60's, which lead to the overwhelming amount of anti-war propaganda by leftist media that didn't exist during the Korean conflict. People remember Vietnam as much for the leftist protests and media shilling as the actual fighting itself.

Korea is forgotten because it wasn't shit to the WW II generation, and it wasn't a shit show on TV the way Vietnam was for everybody else.

>>34235478
Yeah, Remember when the HRE wound up winning the Thirty Years war after Westphalia?

Wait....

>>34235478
Or how Spain actually lost because they wound up giving Catholic Netherlands back?

Wait....

>>34235478
>US achieved its war objectives
>somehow this means they were saving face

???

>>34235561
Don't bother, he let people tell him what to think for so long that actually attempting to explain history to him is likely to be in vain.

>>34235568
Nah, factual things like this triggers the fuck out of people like him because it means that for years they believed a lie.

Their reactions are just to priceless.

>>34235561

>go to war for 15 years to prevent a commie nam
>leave
>it's commie in 2 years

lel

it sure did show US support for containment of commies, at least

>>34235588
Watch as he moves the goalposts all by himself!!!!!

>>34235588
>veitnam was not commie for the 15 years you are there
>you get both sides to sign a peace agreement
>you leave
>years later one side falls
>its your fault

???

>>34235526
>only leftists, commies and shills protested the Vietnam war.

Do fuck off, the US had no mandate to be there and it was propping up a dictatorship no better than the communist Vietnamese.

>>34233970
>>34233938
>>34233927
>let's discuss Korea AKA Vietnam War

>>34235592
The only people shifting goalposts are the US government in relation to their war goal.

>>34235613
>and it was propping up a dictatorship no better

False, he was pro US therefore instantly better for the US.

>>34235622
>the war goal was not peace between SV and NV

???

>>34235622
>Argue that the US lost the war.
>get btfo'd by some history.
>B-BUT MUH CONTASINMENT THO

lol, typical moron.

>>34235561
>>US achieved its war objectives
This is fantasy. A retconning of history caused by cognitive dissonance over the meme that America always wins.

>>34235648
>US War goals was not peace between SV and NV

???

>>34234414
>Stopped communism while in the country
No, NVA were pretty active and weren't even close to being defeated
>No reason to be there
No, politicians pulled the plug after too many bodies where returning home, plus liberals, niggers and junkies protesting with their peace and human right shit.

>>34235656
>>>US War goals was not peace between SV and NV
No, it wasn't. That's a retcon. The goal was to stop the spread of communism, not to delay it.

>>34235674
>Defeating the NVA was the goal but the US did not invade hanoi
>politicions pulled the plug by getting both sides to sign a peace treaty aka the entire reason the US was there

???

>>34235656
The war didn't end because objectives were achieved. The war ended because politicians got cold feet. Politicians tried to save face and preserve the "America always wins" meme by asserting that goals were achieved, but that had nothing to do with reality.

>>34235686
>communism was not stopped by the peace treaty, even though it was stopped until years after it was signed and the US left

???

>>34235700
>getting your enemy to sign a peace agreement is cold feet
>getting your enemy to sign a peace agreement is saving face

???

>>34235724
You are one confused individual.

>>34235692
Why did US sign a peace treaty?
Mightiest military in the world. Because casualties were high and they weren't even close to defeating NVA plus liberals and niggers protesting. They just deemed it useless and managed to get a peace treaty, which gooks violated.

>>34235613
>the US had no mandate to be there

Sure we did. Communism is, and was, a scourge on humanity, and the more useful idiots that the Soviets could create in 3rd world shitholes, the more useful idiots they could employ against the non-communist world.

Soo about the Korean war...

K shits up another thread

>>34235730
>defeating NVA
Wasn't the goal. We weren't there to conquer North Vietnam. Jesus, what fucking school did you go to?

>Americans retreat
>Vietnam falls
>Strategic victory

>Americans retreat
>Iraq falls
>Strategic victory

Im beginning to see a pattern

>>34235740
Right the goal was to stop the spread of communism, Which you failed when you retreated do to political pressure and allowed the North Vietnamese to win.

>>34235748
You keep forgetting the PPA, and then several years later South Vietnam fell.

>>34235748
I bet you think Westphalia was a victory for the Haps, don't you.

>>34235742
The meme of an undefeated America must be preserved no matter what. Logic and reason are less important than that meme.

>>34235724
>"first, we will not be defeated by military means (sic)"
>second, "a military solution is impossible and we will bring them to the peace table (sic)"

>the US military was not defeated and the NV was brought to the peace table and signed an agreement

???

>>34235770
>ignores events in history so that his narrative doesnt fall.
>MUH LOGIK

>>34235742
Going to war with America is like playing tag with that stupid kid who always yelled
>I QUIT, I'M NOT PLAYING ANYMORE
a moment before you caught him

>NO I DIDN'T LOSE BECAUSE I SAID I WASN'T PLAYING ANYMORE

>>34235724
You do realize you just scored an OG by posting that, right?

>>34235780
>Playing tag with America
>I can't catch him.
>Finally agree to stop playing.
>Three days later catch him
>I won!

>>34235730
>Why did US sign a peace treaty?

Because NV gave us what we wanted, peace. Defeating the NVA was not the goal.

>>34235748
>the US did not stop communism from spreading
>getting a peace agreement is retreating

???

>>34235759
The Paris Peace Accords did not end the war, it was the U.S telling the South Vietnamese "Your on your own". the war ended with the fall of saigon

>>34235780
>>34235788
More like:
>Playing tag with America
>I can't catch him.
>Finally agree to stop playing.
>Three days later I catch his little brother
>I won the game from three days ago!

>>34235792
>peace agreements don't end wars
???

>>34235792
This is what it looks like when you learn history from movies, everyone.

>>34235801
>The fall of Saigon wasn't during the Vietnam War! but Vietnam War 2 Electric boogaloo!

>>34235813
>if your enemy signs a peace agreement they win

>>34235730
>Why did US sign a peace treaty?

Because the same political class that's always willing to send men off to die, to waste billions of dollars in resources, and to bomb the shit out of foreigners, never has the political will, or courage, to fully commit to their stupid fucking goals.

>>34235817
>what happened years after the peace agreement is the fault of the US

???

>>34235817
>I think that TimeLife books are the epitome of historical edumacation.

>>34235834
Schlesinger announced early in the morning of 29 April 1975 the evacuation from Saigon by helicopter of the last U.S. diplomatic, military, and civilian personnel. Frequent Wind was arguably the largest helicopter evacuation in history. It began on 29 April, in an atmosphere of desperation, as hysterical crowds of Vietnamese vied for limited space. Martin pleaded with Washington to dispatch $700 million in emergency aid to bolster the regime and help it mobilize fresh military reserves. But American public opinion had soured on this conflict.

In the United States, South Vietnam was perceived as doomed. President Gerald Ford had given a televised speech on 23 April, declaring an end to the Vietnam War and all U.S. aid. Frequent Wind continued around the clock, as North Vietnamese tanks breached defenses on the outskirts of Saigon. In the early morning hours of 30 April, the last U.S. Marines evacuated the embassy by helicopter, as civilians swamped the perimeter and poured into the grounds. Many of them had been employed by the Americans and were left to their fate.

On 30 April 1975, NVA troops entered the city of Saigon and quickly overcame all resistance, capturing key buildings and installations. A tank from the 324th Division crashed through the gates of the Independence Palace at 11:30 am local time and the Viet Cong flag was raised above it. President Dương Văn Minh, who had succeeded Huong two days earlier, surrendered.

>>34235860
>Had to google a book created by Wikipedia.
Pathetic.

>>34235877
Bet you think the U.S won the Iraq war too

>>34235860
>embassy guards are now considered part of a us war effort
>if the US fails to bail out every one of its allies it lost the war itself
???

>>34235881
I don't know. What does Wikipedia tell you happened?

>>34235881
>US puppet still installed
>still asking for US aid

???

>>34235892
Well from your logic, it was a strategic U.S victory, wasn't the U.S fault Iraq fell right after you left

>>34235788
>>34235799
>Playing tag with America
>his legs get tired
>his muscles scream in protest
>he stumbles
>I'M NOT PLAYING ANYMORE
>you catch him
>I DIDN'T LOSE, I WASN'T PLAYING ANYMORE
>I'M WON EVEN THOUGH YOU HAD MORE ENDURANCE

>>34235910
There's three parts of Iraq though.

The Kurd and Shia parts are okay, it's just the Sunni parts that went up in smoke.

>>34235910
>Iraq "fell"

???

>>34233900

I thought no Comets saw service in Korea, just Churchills, Cromwells, and Centurions

>>34235920
>Playing tag with America
>his legs get tired
>his muscles scream in protest
>Still can't catch him.
>Agree to end the game.
Three days later see his little brother
>you catch him
>I CAUGHT AMERICA GUIEZ

lol. Nice try.

File: 1472124115047.png (573KB, 621x672px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 621x672px

>>34233462
You know, I got excited when I saw a Korean War thread in the catalogue, got a little giddy at the ~150 posts too. I clicked with a hope of an active thread filed to the brim with discussion on the Korean War (A war that I feel is sadly forgotten)

Instead I got this.

>>34235941
Blame the Europeans.

>>34235940
>you want a toy and America says no
>you chase America
>America's legs gets tired
>America pleads with you to stop
>you agree
>America collapses to the ground panting
>you take the toy from America

>America declares himself victorious

>>34235963
>it's America panting
>when you signed a paper saying you would stop

???

>>34235963
>you want a toy and America says no
>you chase America
>America's legs gets tired
>America punches you in the Hanoi until you stop
>you agree
>America finishes playing with the toy and puts it on the ground.
>you run up and snatch the toy
>I TOOK THE TOY FROM AMERICA GUIEZ

Another nice try.

>>34235881
Nah, it was outsourced to a civilian sector. Kick back and relax. Your tax money is in better place now.

File: 1495691818818.jpg (23KB, 518x450px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 518x450px

>>34235941
Same I got excited but then quickly disappointed

>>34233895
Yes. Media wasn't involved the way it was in Vietnam.

>>34235970
Considering it's the North Vietnamese who got what they wanted in the end, yeah.

>>34235980
>I DIDN'T WANT THAT TOY ANYWAY
>I NEVER CARED IF YOU GOT IT

>>34235748
>Right the goal was to stop the spread of communism,
Ok, well then.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/apr/22/vietnam-40-years-on-how-communist-victory-gave-way-to-capitalist-corruption

> It also struck a trade deal with the US, and finally hit a peak in 2006 when it was given membership of the World Trade Organisation, which meant it could reap yet more foreign investment and aid. Three decades after the communists emerged as victors in the war, it was now a fully integrated member of the globalised capitalist economy. The west had won after all.


Looks like the US did win after all, according to your own standard

>>34233462
it wasnt a war, it was a conflict. my 2 uncles that went always called it a conflict, my old coworker calls it a conflict. anyone who implies it is a war is a dope.

Isn't this just semantics? The US won the war, but the war was pointless to begin with

You can kill the enemy a bajillion times but if your joke of a puppet government is worthless at actually governing there's no point.

>>34236015
Did they?
Do you think those in charge of the North thought to themselves, "Boy, I hope in 40 years we are in the WTO, have trade deals with US companies and had a booming capitalist economy!"

>>34236015
>the NV wanted to sign a peace agreement

???

>>34235193
>Oppenheimer post
Neat.

>>34233938
Notto dissu shitto agen

>>34235910
>felt right after US left
Kek, it was a peaceful and stable country.
US invaded and turned it into a shithole.
Goal 1, kill hussein. Done
Goal 2, restore peace deomuhcracy. Complete fail.

>>34236161
>Iraq is not still a democracy
>outside invasions are the fault of the us

???

>>34235733
Why we don't have Korea threads.

>>34236042
Do you think those men storming Normandy thought to themselves, "Boy, I hope my grandson chops off his dick and lets men fuck him up the ass."?

>>34236221
Essentially.

They most likely thought, "I'm fighting so my sons can have the freedom to do what they want"

>>34236029
You are genuinely pushing a senior citizen status.

>>34236243
Good post.

>>34236243
>>34236295
>If I don't storm this beach, the Germans will stop my grandson from chopping his dick off
Right.

>>34233462
Not enough memes for it to be popular on here. /k/ is all about memes since the population has been driven out by ledditors.

>>34236343
Germans were stopping a lot of what they viewed as degenerecy

>>34236355
>the germans are stopping their sons from chopping off their dicks
>therefore I must storm this beach

https://youtu.be/3rf-KpVgus8

>>34236343
What's even the point of trannies without the dick?

>>34234018
So is Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now the media can't report jack shit on what's going on over there.

There has to be some balance between too much and not enough to keep the public's interest.

File: contemplativejazz.gif (891KB, 500x418px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 500x418px

>>34233938
>we didn't loose. We gave up

God damn, you are on 400 deeper and intertwined levels of denial than the generals themselves after the war. For fucks sake.

>>34236365
Sounds about right

>>34234655
Because it's not like the Soviets wouldn't develop nukes later, and then have an excuse to use it by saying "hey look the Americans did it too."

Heh no, looks like you've been using your REALLY REALLY big noggin.

>>34233927
You mean after we dragged them to the peace talks and forced them to sign the peace accords at gunpoint? And then left because by all rational standards we had literally just won the war? Not returning when they chimped out and limped their last two companies of infantry across the border was the correct choice.

>>34236496
And?

>>34236496
Should have just nuked the commie bastards before they managed to get their nuclear weapons program to the point they could retaliate.

>>34233462
A war my country joined with something like 10.000+ men (Not flag)

The only proof that we went there to fight are 60 photos on google with the average resolution of 400x400


This year i am going to visit my uncle he had a shitload of pictures of my grandfather in the war
I am going to try to scan them and upload them on the internet

>>34234173
Just say Germany you autist.

File: 1442252040053.gif (149KB, 255x191px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 255x191px

>>34233938
>We didn't lose.
>We gave up
With every post burgers dig themselves further and further into their own delusions, fucking Christ

>>34237545
>With every post burgers dig themselves further and further into their own delusions, fucking Christ

The dragging lasting effect of political correctness. I am really wondering how and when it will finally burst.

>>34235781
og?

Bitches don't know about my frozen chosin.

>>34233938

You attacked people who wanted to be your allies because HURRRR GOMMIES ARE ALWAYS DER ENEMY! The only thing worse than a pointless war is a pointless war between friendly nations.

>>34234552
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AaGVAipGp0

Here it is from the man himself.

>open thread expecting at least a quick rundown on the Korean War
>get caught in a shit tossing about Vietnam
sasuga. Can I get a quick rundown on Korea lads?

>>34233462
>How come the Korean War is never discussed on here?

US war with no ARs or saving ryans privates style film and most critically no Wehrmacht . This means it war not a real war to

A)Nogunz larpers and ARfags
b)Blowins from pol
c)The hollywood educated

>>34238885

It was basically lots of stuff happened in less than a year, followed by two years of not much:

>Japan occupied Korea is split along the 38th parallel after WW2 with the North run by communist dictator Kim Il Sung with USSR (& PRC) backing, and the South run by the similarly unpleasant Syngman Rhee with US backing.
>The North is armed by the USSR, and communist unrest is stoked (and brutally suppressed by Syngman Rhee).
>June 1950, the North invades the South and rapidly overruns the lightly armed, poor morale Southern forces.
>US ground forces stationed in the West Pacific (Korea & Japan) since the post WW2 demobilisation and defense cuts are in no shape to fight effectively, get pushed into a desperate defense of the Southern port of Pusan.
>USA uses the UN security council to justify its intervention with UN support (because Taiwan holds China's seat, and Moscow is boycotting it because of that).
>September 1950, MacArthur lands at Incheon, threatening to cut off the North Korean forces in the South, they withdraw and keep retreating North.
>The PRC gives warnings about the USA pushing to the Chinese border, which MacArthur in his hubris ignores.
> October 1950, the PRC, fearing that like the Japanese, the USA intends to invade China from Korea, resume the Chinese Civil War to bring back the KMT, intervenes in a large scale with a large force of WW2 & Chinese Civil War veteran troops, pushing the US & RoK forces back in another retreat.
>Though there are some US/RoK counterattacks, there is a large Chinese spring offensive in 1951, which fizzled out around the 38th parallel.
>For the next two years, there are no significant exchanges of territory, as negotiations between the USA & RoK on one side and the USSR, PRC & DPRK on the other drag on, as each side attempts to gain the upper hand. Eventually an armistice agreement was reached.

>>34239141
thanks

Asids from being a continuation of WWII and the war that "started" the Cold War, the fact that Korea threads eventually just become Vietnam threads, as we're seeing right now.

>>34235941
Every fucking time, why is it so hatd for k to just dicuss war tactics and history?

>>34239367
what even in the fuck

>>34239405
That's what happens when you outsource to India.

>>34239367
>>34239405
>>34239432
I am not a smart man. What am I looking at here?

>>34239393
/k/ has never been willing to handle any of it.

You can bring the facts to the table here, but they won't necessarily have any weight here.

/k/ has always put all personal preferences before things that actually work. That's the nature of /k/.

File: charlie1.jpg (19KB, 320x314px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 320x314px

>>34239518
>Korean War memorial
Shows, Abrams tanks, modern and Vietnam era US soldiers, Huey Helicopters, and F16's

>>34239576
Oh... oh dear. I was looking for typos.

>>34239518
>korean war monument
>gulf war and vietnam troops
>m1 tank
>h34 helicopter
>reenactment of suribachi flag raising
nd others im sure

>>34236724
UN forces? What country? The only non US or Korean troops in the UN forces of note that I know of are the Turks

>>34239785
UN Command:[a]

United States
United Kingdom
Canada
Turkey
Australia
Philippines
New Zealand
Thailand
Ethiopia
Greece
France
Colombia
Belgium
South Africa
Netherlands
Luxembourg

>>34234432
>Read how David Hackworth tubed his career in protest over how the war was misfought by military leaders. He was the ONLY US officer to put duty before career.


Poor guy was being groomed be a general until he decided "fuck this shit, the generals are idiots and we can't win"

He really got fucked over doing the right thing.

We need more good Korean War discussion. I actually just acquired a M1 Carbine that served in Korea. My grandfather also served in Korea, unfortunately he died before I was born so good stories :(

>>34233927

American here, Vietnam was a failure. Sure we killed more zipperheads than they killed us (ridiculously so) but the commies won in the end. A lot of my countrymen are too prideful about this point, they don't see that it makes us look worse to deny it. I like to joke that we won in the long run though, as there's a McDonald's in Ho Chi Minh City now.

>>34235208
>"The U.S. government viewed its involvement in the war as a way to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam. This was part of the domino theory of a wider containment policy, with the stated aim of stopping the spread of communism worldwide"
>communism spreads to south vietnam
what good are all the curbstomps if you don't accomplish what you set out to do

US should never have gotten involved in Korea

Korean people got fucked over because US decided to turn Korea into a dick swinging contest

>>34239432
Jesus Fuck, I thought you were kidding.

>Production was outsourced to India, where imaging was done and sent to the veterans group in Ohio before the engravings were made. Strausbaugh said the committee members did not notice the inaccuracies when they saw an image of the planned memorial.

>"It was made out of black granite. It was just beautiful," he told Reuters by telephone.

>For some, the biggest gaffe was omitting names of those who died in fighting.

>"My family was insulted on the day it was unveiled," said Tina Kutschbach, whose uncle John E. Kutschbach was fatally wounded in 1953 by a grenade in fighting on the Korea peninsula.

>He died a few days later at a military hospital in Japan and was buried less than a mile away from the new monument.

>Kutschbach's name was one of a half dozen left off the list of 18 on the plaque, she said.

This country is FUCKED

Came for interesting thread,left because 5th comment triggered a 30 message long autism fueled shitfest that has nothing to do with the thread theme.
Classic /k/

>>34233927

Please explain to me why you think this. The US military willingly left, of their own accord, after the political administration decided we were not going to fight.

Usually when you lose a war, you are defeated militarily and forced to disarm, but no such thing happened to the US, so how could you say it was really a loss militarily?

It was a political defeat. And in many ways you can say that the notion "u lost da war!!" speaks of an uneducated opinion that probably belongs to a person so dependent on common sense to survive that they are unable to tell that just because there is clouds in the sky does not equate absolutely to rain.

>>34244220
>>Usually when you lose a war, you are defeated militarily and forced to disarm,
>Usually

>>34244246

And that hurts my point how?

>>34233963

>there weren't any groups that were opposed to North Vietnam or their policies

I guess thats why the Vietnamese military had to literally cordon off the Central Highlands, eh cuck?

>>34234210

Yes, that's precisely how democracy works you twit.

>>34235193
Oppenheimer, I've gotta ask, what exactly is your field/education that's gotten you this wealth of knowledge on nuclear weapons?

>>34244272
You have no point. You're "not disarmed, therefore not defeated" argument is ridiculous.

>>34244352

Er, so an army in theatre can be not disarmed, in working order, supplied, accomplishing its objectives, and then after it withdraws from said theatre (due to non-military reasons) its ally is defeated and somehow you can come out and say that the army (which is no longer in theatre) is defeated, at this point?

Do you maybe now see where your logic is flawed?

>>34244435
>An army that flees the theater is not defeated
Absurd.

>>34244305
Find him in a nuclear thread and ask him.