Are there any weapons that could have allowed for the USA to

>>35095197
Any weapon aimed at all the chikenshit journalists would have done the job.

>>35095197
in 10 years, newfags will be asking the same question except about Afghanistan.

invisible lines on the map (dmz for vietnam and Paki border for OEF) defeat American combat supremacy.

>>35095197
A napalm strike on Berkeley.

>>35095197
Unrestricted use of napalm.
The military had all the technology it needed.

>>35095225
>>35095262
These.

More boots on the ground to hold the areas they've bombed and naped the fuck out of

Increase length of a tour of duty and and stricter enforcement of discipline

Lastly, kill anybody that attacks a homecoming soldier. The video of the soldier who was drafted being spat on by the lucky cunt that avoided the draft by being upper middle class and a 'conscientious objector' makes my fucking blood boil. I'd love to kill that cunt

>>35095197
The USA did win the vietnam war

having an actual objective in the war and and understanding that war isn't just a game of Deathmatch would have helped

>>35095277
Unrestricted use of napalm wouldn't have that big of an effect. Doesnt matter how much flame you can pump into the forest, you still gotta have the ability to continuously drop it

Being allowed to go north and defeat north vietnam. Which they would never be allowed to do, so no.

>>35095197
Zyklon B for all the hippies.

File: k8688.gif (60KB, 300x457px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 300x457px

>>35095197

>>35095344
This and this>>35095283

>>35095197
They already dominated every engagement with the weapons they had. They failed by political attrition, not setting clear military and political goals, wishful thinking and relying on corrupt allies. Things could have gotten interesting if they had invaded North Vietnam though.

>>35095197
Is common sense a weapon?

>>35095197
Operation Linebacker III, IV, V, VI etc.

>>35095197
No.

Shitty leadership and a lack of a clear goal made the conflict fundamentally unwinnable.

>>35095344
Because that worked out so well in Korea.

>>35095692
considering south korea still exists, I'd say it worked pretty well actually

Public executions of American Communists.

>>35095197
A firm commitment to reinvade if the north attacked the south which would be respected by democrats.

MKULTRA
>cloned dinosaurs

>>35095197
Determination and balls.

The military wasn't allowed to do shit. The north went to the peace table when they've did things they could do on day 1(mine the harbors, perform raids on supply bases in Cambodia and Laos etc.).

Also these guys:
>>35095225
>>35095262
Are right. Many of the people covering it should've been fucking hanged.

>>35095197
they should help the Vietnamese after WW2 instead of help the Frog taking back their colony

>>35095197
Not withdrawing the troops

File: 1498060812673.png (162KB, 276x290px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 276x290px

>>35095300
The best thing the USA can say is that they didn't lose. You can't show up, kick a bunch of ass, get tired and then leave just so you can watch the enemy roll up everything you spent the last decade defending, and say that somehow you defeated the people that are still in power today.

>>35095402
Only through its complete absence among politicians, then it's lethal (to your own side)!

>>35095692
south korea exists, while south vietnam does not.

Repression of the media and hippie culture, a properly staffed military rather than a drafted minority cesspit, unrestricted bombing doctrine rather than scripted bombing sites, etc.

Realistically if he hadn't pulled out at the first sign of the North starting to crumble we'd have won, but we lost simply by signing a ceasefire.

(barring the nuke)

Why bar the nuke? If you are going to kill hundreds-of-thousands of the enemy, including civies, why should the deliver system matter? The nuke hasn't been used again because of politics. But in reality fighting a 10 year war and sending 57,000 young Americans to their deaths for no reason was more immoral than dropping nukes.

File: image.jpg (35KB, 438x228px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 438x228px

Honestly we really didn't need any special weapon to win the war, we we're winning before the Paris peace accords. All we needed was some non communist congressmen who would have backed the south when the north started fighting again. If we would have flexed on them once they would have backed down. It makes me mad because vietnam could actually be a good country right now if we didn't leave our allies.

>>35095197
It wouldn't be what weapon, but how to make South Vietnam command not a corrupt shitshow. Maybe than a armistice wouldn't have to be signed

>>35095300
What >>35096027 said.

If you ever bother to read the second page of Clausewitz book "On War." You'd understand that war is just an extension of politics when words fail. US did not meet its political goals in Vietnam and failed to contain the spread of Communism in the region. Thus the war was a failure. Any stories of tactics and slaughtering of gooks doesn't change these simple facts.

>>35096152
South Vietnam doesn't exist because the north didn't listen to the treaty 2 years after the fact and the US didn't want to go in again

I would distribute Synthetic weed (like K2) in the US that would make the hippies more barbaric and ready for war.

I would give a green light to shoot on any journalist (AKA anyone with a camera or a microphone) Anyone who could bring back 50 journo ears would win a flight home and a free hunting trip

The rest of the war effort would consist of using weather manipulation to completely flood Vietnam and turn it into SURFtopia.

>>35095197
Actually, yes- telling the CIA to fuck off.

Can't believe I'm in before the right answer

.308

File: Jawujyw.jpg (180KB, 912x616px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 912x616px

>>35097335

>>35095197
An agent orange dump on congress

>>35095225
>WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH HWHY CAINT WE CUHMIT WAR CRIMES IN PEACE, THOSE FUCKIN JOURNALISTS WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

File: image.jpg (32KB, 804x585px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 804x585px

>>35097402
>Vietnam war crimes
>any Different then what happens any every war

>>35096027

You can if you are familiar with the concept of time.

>>35095300
This is the type of faggot who'll turn around and say the Soviets lost in Afghanistan, without a trace of irony.

>>35097776
To wqin a war one must accomplich one's goals. The goals of the Vietnam war were to create divisiveness in the American populace, destroy the ability of the trained segmment of the populaiton to resist tyranny, make a shitload of money for Remington and DOW and some other companies and to allow the CIA to establish a foothold in the drug industry to fund the ops that are so black they CAN'T have congressional oversight.

So yeah, America DID win the Vietnam war.

>>35097826
>muh MIC

are you an anarchist by chance?

the goal was to prevent communism from gaining another foothold, and that didn't work out so well did it?

>>35097057
https://youtu.be/T1lc4rqh7ZU

File: 1382361578411.png (22KB, 207x239px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 207x239px

>>35097826
>w-we m-meant to l-lose all along!!

>>35096942
>>35095300
>>35097826

I think people often confuse that there are varying degrees of success.

Militarily, USA was crushing it and we can say that we were winning.

Politically though, the end goal was a democratic Vietnam - which initially was a loss but looking at current day Vietnam they're so capitalist they'd cozy up to the US in a second to repel the current Chinese border incursions. So it really makes you wonder if maybe we won after all.

>bonus points, mother fucking sriracha was created in America by a Vietnamese refugee and now that condiment is a house hold item in every restaurant and house in Vietnam

File: Captured-VC-photograph.jpg (303KB, 1127x1397px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1127x1397px

Soviet War in Afghanistan proved a super power could still be defeated without civil unrest at home, restrictive ROEs in combat, an uncooperative independent media, and the other common excuses given for Vietnam.

Trying to prop up unpopular regimes is the problem.

File: 131519_172180086156474_7447866_o.jpg (448KB, 2048x1583px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 2048x1583px

>>35095197
The modifications requested for the tactical gook crusher.

File: 1442429988881543.jpg (37KB, 640x473px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x473px

>>35097940

Vietnam set the precedent that for a modern military, anything less than a complete and quick victory with very little casualties is not a "win"

We could destabilize a region with war for an entire generation, install and complete our deep-gov bullshit and leave voluntarily without actually losing anything even slightly important. Or even losing ground during the conflict, and that is a "loss" if we do not literally genocide the enemy while simultaneously being told to pull out.

Realisticly how many decades does it take to "fix" a country? Five at least? By the new definition of victory we would have to occupy a country for five decades without any major fuckups for it to be a victory.

>>35095197
A different approach to the war, such as actually invading North Vietnam

>>35097840
My political leanings are irrelevant.

If they goal of the war was to actually stop communism, then why was the bombing campaign in the north stopped? Why was the scope of the war not expanded to include Cambodia, Laos and Thailand?

No, looking back over what was done, it's pretty clear that no one in power actually gave a shit about the spread of communism; either they knew it was ultimately going to fail and the more people who experienced it the faster it woud collapse, or they thought communism was a good idea and just wanted to use the war as leverage for internal politics.

>>35097927
>2017
>still thinks the USSR was a monolithic entity without internal factions and strife.

>>35097956
Longer than that. Minimum of 3 generations (75 years) to instill western thought and democratic tradition, and that assumes that you can completely crush the old religion/culture first. Realistically we're talking a holodomor-level event followed by 75 years of totoalitarian occupation to create a stable ally/client state.

File: file.png (86KB, 200x240px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 200x240px

>>35098128
:^)

So why does nobody say because the US refused to go back in again? There already was a peace that kept both Vietnams and then the North invaded again and the US just let it happen instead of supporting their Southern allies again.But well, the South failed because it was so corrupt while the North had discipline.

>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

Maybe don't commit shit like this. Propaganda is a very powerful weapon.

>>35098212
When Soviets left Afghanistan communists were still in power. USA didn't achieve it's goals. It's like it you built a house and it collapsed the next day. You can't really call that a succesful project.

>>35098212
Because the Paris Peace Accords were a fig leaf.

Nixon and Kissenger were both caught in the white house tapes talking about how all they needed was a "reasonable interval" of 18 to 24 months before South Vietnam collapsed, so that they could wash their hands of it.

>>35097896
Sriracha is damn near a household item in the US too

>>35096942
>US did not meet its political goals in Vietnam and failed to contain the spread of Communism
Just a figleaf for the masses. The true aim was to appease France for NATO, and then for national pride. A dismal failure in both cases.

>>35095197
Your question is retarded. The US had all the weapons they needed to win. They were never defeated militarily they just had rules of engagement that made winning impossible no matter how many enemies they killed.

>>35095197
The m16a1 was enough. America didn't win the war because America didn't want to do what it took to win.

File: VA030934.jpg (554KB, 1415x1136px) Image search: [Google]

554KB, 1415x1136px

>>35098743

File: VA030900.jpg (447KB, 1433x1141px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 1433x1141px

>>35098862

File: VA030928.jpg (395KB, 1424x1127px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 1424x1127px

>>35098873

File: VA030935.jpg (443KB, 1411x1127px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1411x1127px

>>35098885

>>35095197

I'm quite certain thermals would have been helpful.

File: VA030899.jpg (537KB, 1406x1127px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 1406x1127px

>>35098893

File: VA030926.jpg (483KB, 1415x1127px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1415x1127px

>>35098903

>>35097896
> the end goal was a democratic Vietnam
Haha, no. At the time, a democratic Vietnam would had been a communist Vietnam. The intervention in the first place was to thwart democracy.

File: VA030931.jpg (508KB, 1433x1141px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 1433x1141px

>>35098915

>>35095197
yeah, the one that let us invade cambodia.

File: VA030929.jpg (419KB, 1141x1415px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1141x1415px

>>35098924

>>35097402
>implying the north was a beacon of morality

File: VA030933.jpg (488KB, 1415x1168px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1415x1168px

>>35098932

File: k_a_magical_place_vietnam_collage.jpg (2MB, 1600x1205px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1600x1205px

>>35097896
Interestingly, it's the very fact that we pulled out that makes Vietnam willing to deal with us over China today. China has been trying to conquer Vietnam for millennia, but the US has no desire to hold on to that morass of jungles, swamps, and mountains as anything more than an independent trading partner and surfing destination. This gives the gooks a strong incentive to side with us against Beijing.
>mfw Trump made the Prime Minister of Vietnam sit in front of the USMC flag for a photo op

File: VA040897.jpg (394KB, 1415x1150px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 1415x1150px

>>35098939

>>35095197

One that prevented Democrats from being elected.

>>35095197
Winning in Vietnam was simple, all we had to do was no be so big of assholes to the South Vietnamese that they considered rule by North Vietnam preferable to whatever the US had to offer.

File: 1474049114051.jpg (91KB, 1143x1200px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1143x1200px

>>35095197
Ah helicopter that could dump leftist back home into the Pacific.

>>35095338
Shhhhh. Don't post that here. /k/ doesn't like that.

>>35095197
The only way it could have been done would have been a hard line approach.

-Restrict the news media, tell them to fuck off. Enforce OPSEC, stateside and abroad.

-Hold what we take. The enemy wants anything via negotiation? Put ourselves in a position to take more and make greater demands. No ceasefires because that clearly wouldn't work. But if they want a hill, we demand the return of all prisoners held at XYZ camp by a certain date. If they stall or refuse, begin advancing towards a major objective and burn everything surrounding Hanoi to where the only view they have from the highest point of the city is scorched earth.

-Physically isolate their population. Create a scorched earth barrier along their borders, drop leaflets to clarify that anything sighted in the scorched area will be destroyed. Begin an open season policy on anything in such areas, reburn everything at irregular intervals. At the start of any major offensive or push by the North, wipe out a population center. White phosphorus ala Dresden, napalm, fuel-air explosives. Ramp up psyops campaigns against their population centers and combatants. Drop pamphlets with images of their dead soldiers, captured equipment and destroyed farms. Drop images of their soldiers committing war crimes. Drop propaganda that rationally explains why communism will not work.

>>35098862
You're an absolute retard if you think this is in any way relevant to what he said

>all the idiots in this thread who think going after people with political views they don't like in the US would have helped
>implying instability at home during a proxy war with another superpower beneficial
>implying Russia wouldn't have taken advantage of that
>implying the US wouldn't have lost even harder
Sure is underage in here.

File: 1504088757215.jpg (31KB, 552x774px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 552x774px

>>35097402
>implying the werent there to spin their own lies

>>35099119

>drop propaganda that rationally explains why communism will not work

Most Vietnamese didn't give a shit about communism, they just thought they were defending their country against foreign invaders. Hell, even the CP of Vietnam didn't seem to really believe in communism. The idea was to use some marxist-leninist and maoist methods to modernise while pushing nationalist policies. They didn't become a Chinese or Russian puppet, China got so pissed off that they had a short border war with Vietnam and there are still tensions. It just shows that the domino theory was a load of bullcrap.

>>35099193
The post isn't about the politics of the Vietnam War. It's about strategy and tech that might have altered the outcome.

You strike me as the sort of person who goes into threads about how the Germans could have had a different outcome in either of the world wars and calls anyone who responds a Nazi.

It's hindsight. It won't affect anything at all, maybe individual thought. Per the politics, I can't say I give a shit. I think a thread about how the French could have thwarted the German invasion during the early years of world war two would be just as interesting. Maybe a thread on how the British could have defeated the American colonial uprising, or how the IRA could have waged an effective campaign for independence.

The theme of this thread isn't politics, it's weapons and strategy. Go back to facebook before your computer teacher catches you on this site.

>>35099274
They didn't really care on an individual level, many couldn't even read. Many Vietnamese thought the Americans were still the French.

But the North Vietnamese government would have devoted manpower and assets scurrying to gather up leaflets before locals laid eyes on them. It would have resulted in individual government actions on their own civilians, which would affect war production, morale, the opinions of their civilians against their own government.

Forcing an enemy government to devote time and resources to come up with an argument that justifies communism and spread it around means resources diverted away from their war effort.

Even if it didn't work as planned, it's only leaflets and radio broadcasts.

File: NO U.jpg (30KB, 491x398px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 491x398px

>>35099364
>no u
NO U

>>35098862
DRIVE ME CLOSER I WISH TO HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD!

File: casey-neistat-we-can.jpg (95KB, 1140x700px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1140x700px

This fucking thing. Near instant vomiting upon viewing.

File: image.jpg (78KB, 247x267px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 247x267px

>>35095197
Yes there is. The weapon called rules of engagement.

>we fucked it all up by trying to be friends with the people we were fighting. We should've killed them all until they break and surrender.

This is the exact same reason why we've been in the Middle East for 16 fucking years.

>stop fucking about and start killing en mass.

>>35099193
>Instability at home costs us the war
>some people say we should have dealt with it
>other people say dealing with the instability at home would have created instability at home which would benefit the enemy
Kind of like the argument used by subversive communists within the us:
>Dont stop us from subverting your country! Free speech is free speech! Removing our freedoms is exactly what the enemy wants you to do! If you censor us they win!
You can't win as long as comumunists are alive

1. Nuke every major North Vietnamese city and military base
2. Launch chemical and biological weapons and napalm against every jungle stronghold and defended village
3. profit

>>35100779
>Become instantly vilified by the entire world
atleast we killed some rice farmers.

>>35095341
A napalm capable dirigible perhaps?

>>35097896

But this is too much nuance for Europeans who like posting pictures of starving southeast Asian peasants and try to say that the U.S. can't beat them.

We lost the war because of Educational Exceptions and ROEs, not because of an inability to massacre gooks.

>>35095197

My friend fought in Vietnam and said that the fact we couldn't cross a specific parallel is the second biggest thing to screw us up, aside from the journalists.

>>35095300

Oh, and speaking of my Vietnam veteran friend...the US won the war once the Tet offensive was over. The only problem was that we failed to occupy it.

Same thing that happened after WWI, and what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan right now.

>>35097335
They had .308 though

It's only a failure to occupy a country if your mission is occupation. That's not what anyone really wanted in Vietnam. People did want to cross over into the north, but not to occupy it, but to fuck up Charlie enough so that they can keep them out of the south. The whole strategy is kinda... Weird? They didn't want Korean war II but they didn't really have a real end game besides killing all the baddies until they give up.

Really though, going into the north would have really pissed off all the other commies in the world. The USSR would have seen it as a reason to step over into NATO satellite countrys. The whole doctrine change from Korean 'we will counter invade' to vietnam 'we will support your own army' really got us stuck in a real pickle. The whole point of the change was to keep Americans from being dragged into a war we would have to finish. So if we just help some one else's army if something bad happened, the idea was that they would build up their army and be much more proactive in deffense. You know what isn't a stabilizing action? Building up a massive army and being told that America isnt going to finish any war you get stuck in.

To go into the north would mean that we'd have to change international policy, and potentially reignite some nasty build up of war between the big boys, and not just the third worlders looking into Marx.

>>35099680
wow that guy that got run over by the ISIS tank survived. Inspiring.

>>35095197
Anti-Personnel cluster munitions, gas, and use of ground forces in Laos/Cambodia

>>35095197
Kicking Jane Fonda out of a helicopter over DaNang

Tigers

File: 1476748188884.png (375KB, 785x757px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 785x757px

uh, me. if i was there i could have killed ho chi minh.

>>35095300
And then we wadded that victory up and threw it in the trash, condemning a million people to death or prison camps, millions more to a couple decades of Communist Utopia Poverty(tm), and thousands more to desperate escapes on flimsy rafts.

But, hey, the Democratic Party got to stick it to the Republicans, so it was all worth it!

>>35098418
Should we have just kept France occupied? It seems like they have harmed us more than helped us ever since we liberated them.

>>35098919
If by "democratic", you mean that the people got to vote one time, whereupon all further votes would be rigged and meaningless, sure.

After all, the German Democratic Republic and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea were certainly always democratic, it was in their names!

>>35097382
Tigerstripe is the most aesthetic camo

>>35097896
>>35097896
>>35097896
>>35097896
>>35097896
Best response in this thread

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords
The United States secured peace between the two countries and left the country. The north breaks the agreement and launches a new offensive, and defeats South Vietnam. What part of that is a US defeat?

>>35097940
>tfw imagining this thing rolling through a village crushing gook women and children while a muffled It Ain't Me plays in the background

>>35105325
The part where the US withdraws from the country in the middle of an active war, leaving a full third of the land under communist control and having exhausted all of their political capital to continue fighting.

FIG LEAF
I
G

L
E
A
F

>have allies who have decades of jungle warfare experience and know how to win a war so much
>either piss them off so much that they don't join the war (britain), or if they do join it try and tell them what they are doing is wrong (australia)

File: 167417_172179946156488_5081562_n.jpg (59KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 720x480px

>>35105419

>>35095197
Yeah, it's called "good leadership".

>>35099274
Jungle gooks then went on to install two Commie government in Lao and Cambodia under USSR commands, while chinks tried to make them Chinese-friendly (Khmer), that's the reason border war happend. The domino theory is true, but it didnt predict that chinks love the shekels more than they love Mao.

>>35095341
I dont think you fully understand the amount of ordinance dropped on the gooks, their shitty villages, and every tree inbetween. The us could easily keep up around the clock bombing runs anywhere in south vietnam and probably in the north too. If you just cross the border and napalm the fuck out of the North's cities, they might not want to continue for long.

File: libtard central.jpg (112KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 800x600px

>>35095262

Berkeley resident here.

Please do. Avoid destroying the train station and Marina though. Spenger's Grotto is too good to lose.

Feel free to render Telegraph Avenue an uninhabitable wasteland though.

>>35095197
A bullet, fired through John "Songbird" McCains fucking temple. The man who fucked a carrier up before being captured while showboating over Vietnam, just to reveal all of the US's bombing routes to the chinks.

That being said, I couldn't care less about winning or losing vietnam, would have been better to never have gotten involved in the first place.

>>35105456
Pretty sure we (USA) were doing quite fine slaughtering gooks on the lonesome.

>>35097682
> b-b-b-but but other people do it tooo!!! It is totally normal!
> what? Some propaganda guy from ISIS writes on twitter that Assad used chemical weapons somewhere without providing any proof? NUKE SYRIA!!!!
/k/ucks are really retarded

File: 1482788288487.jpg (100KB, 681x885px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 681x885px

>>35106268
They tried this and they still lost.
And burgers had to flee, like the little pathetic losers they are.

And right now, 50% of Afghanistan is under control of the Taliban. After 16 years of war, the USA gets BTFO again, by sandniggers.

Anyone have that quote from Apocalypse Now where Kurtz writes that if soldiers didnt have access to creature comforts the war could've been one with a fourth of the military presence and time?

>>35095197
Dollar diplomacy.

>>35107017
>US leaves and puts a government in control
>government loses against the same people the US was shitstomping
>US lost lol
every time

>>35107273
> hahaha guys, this was all as expected! We planned to throw helicopters into the see, it was totally intentional, we didn't get BTFO by simple farmers! The whole war just went like expected, lol. Jokes on you!

Operation "Frequent wind" aka "Flee like the loser you are, before farmers kill you" was a success!

>>35107440
"us lost lol"

File: 1501220984325.jpg (70KB, 800x560px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x560px

>>35107452
You think that they won?
Advanced technology can't save you, if your soldiers are pussies and total retards who are scared of farmers.

>>35107461
>nuclear weapons are now outdated weapons

WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN

HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN SITTING ON THIS INFORMATION

>>35107461
I wonder why those ex-soldiers are now proud to be Vietnam Veterans.
They were an embarrassment for their country and they should kill themselves.

>>35107474
> Vietnam had nuclear weapons!
American education.
Just change history, so that your defeat doesn't look so bad anymore?

>>35107461
US lost the culture war to continue the war. Otherwise the US was winning the Vietnam war. The people lost the appetite to fight.

>>35095197
No. The war was lost politically, not militarily.

File: 1476374375947.jpg (15KB, 220x293px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 220x293px

>>35107522
> if you have to flee and the enemy takes over the whole land you fought for, you win

File: looks like victory to me.jpg (11KB, 269x187px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 269x187px

>>35095197

>Implying we didn't win the Vietnam War.

Nice try you fucking hippie.

>>35107497
>China didn't have nuclear weapons
>North Vietnam didn't have a defense pact with China

I bet you think it was a "native insurgency" too.

>>35097402
>not committing war crimes against jungle niggers who smear their own shit on bamboo stakes hidden by leaves

as soon as that shit hit the news there should've been no repercussions

napalm everything

>>35107817
>kill a gook
>gook doesn't tell you when communist gooks mine the game trail
>Johnny loses a leg
>get angry
>kill more gooks
>families of the gooks you kill start working for communist gooks
>repeat until your unit is taking KIA on every patrol and everyone back home treats you the same as SS

Congratulations, you played yourself.

>>35095283
>killing people for spitting

What's it like having the government's giant cock in your ass, you fucking panzy cunt? You're the biggest bitch on this board.

>>35107772
if China would have wanted to start a nuclear war for vietnam, they would have done it, the USA was already in the war and committed war crimes with their nigger behaviour.

The USA would have won this war if the US soldiers wouldn't be niggers and retards.
Every "Vietnam war Veteran" should just die. The incompetent soldiers are the reason why the USA lost.
You can't win a war if your soldiers are raping and burning children to death and every single person in the country starts to hate you.

By never having been involved. We had no place intervening in Vietnam.

t. a commie hater

>>35107017
>50% of Afghanistan is under control of the Taliban
Where do you get these absurd numbers

>>35107005
Nice escalation and misleading.
War crimes are a thing, but WW2 showed it's the victor who decides what is and is not a war crime.
Get fucked friendo.

>>35108725
From the last quarterly report of SIGAR (Special Inspector General of Afghanistan Reconstruction) to the United States Congress.
https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2017-01-30qr.pdf
> U.S. Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) reported that approximately 57.2% of the
country’s 407 districts are under Afghan government control or influence as
of November 15, 2016, a 6.2% decrease from the 63.4% reported last quarter in
late August, and a nearly 15% decrease since November 2015.
Just yesterday the USA tried to attack ISIS and Taliban in Nangarhar Afghanitan and it failed and they got repelled. 2 days ago the USA decided to send 3,500 more soldiers to afghanistan, because they are losing.

The mighty USA is losing to sandniggers.
Why don't you know anything about this? Are /k/ucks such US bootlickers that they just ignore every single news about US soldiers getting BTFO?

>>35108794
Having the population on your side is important during a war... yes, if you won the war, you can change history to your liking, but if you are losing because your soldiers are retarded niggers, you don't have this chance anymore.

The USA lost and the soldiers committing war crimes is one of the major reasons for it.
Vietnam veterans are subhumans.They are a shame for the whole USA.

File: 1501722326911.jpg (12KB, 236x315px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 236x315px

>>35108842
>The US and Afghan forces control over 57% of the country
>Therefore, the Taliban controls the other part
Oh wait, you're retarded. Next couple of lines in the document you linked.

>According to USFOR-A, the number of districts under insurgent control or influence rose 2% from August 30 to November 15, 2016, to 10.1% of the country’s total districts, and the number of contested districts rose 4.2% over the same period to 32.7% of all districts.

>>35108949
So if it is not Taliban or ISIS who is controlling half of the country which is not under US control, why can't they just take it?
And this after 16 fucking years?

Are you really going to tell me that this isn't a total embarrassment? And how is it possible that they are losing more areas than they are gaining?

You have the superior technology. You have the higher numbers. You have the better weapons. But you are still losing.
How do you explain this?
On the pro-US-sockpuppet government side are > 360,000 soldiers.
All other factions like Taliban and ISIS together have about 70,000 soldiers.
And you lose.

>>35108794
Nah, because some Allied forces were also accused of war crimes

>>35108914
Fuck off hippy

>>35109041
> everyone who realizes that US soldiers being niggers is the major reason that they lost is a hippy

The US lost thousands of jets and helicopters in Vietnam, people seem to have this really weird misconception that it was 'kind of like iraq insurgency or afganistan' no it was entirely different.

Anyone who says 'just be totally badass and brutally kill everyone and burn down more villages' is a retard. Nazis tried that in eastern europe and it never worked; all you do is double the size of the VC overnight

no more 'determination' and 'balls' doesnt make you win an unwinnable conflict

>>35095197
Short of a literal mind control device, no. You cant win a war if you dont have clearly defined objectives. You also cant win a war if your objective is cultural conversion without the believed threat of genocide.

File: war.gif (2MB, 659x609px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 659x609px

>>35095197
Genocide. Stop being pussies y'all

>>35111588
you cant genocide the north vietnamies because the VC and NVA will stop you

>>35097402
>Gook kills tens of civilians using civilian clothes
>Literally a war crime
>Gook gets executed
>Faggot sends image of gook just end to lib media
>lib media say "gook dindu nuffin"
>Image still famous,most normies still think gook dindu nuffin.
Go back to https://8ch.pl/leftypol/

hold territory and plan advances in a more conventional manner, more troops on less intense tours to help with relations at home and have soldiers more motivated to fight. I would say the reliance on helicopters for assaults and QRF was overused and predictable. From my knowledge i think the weakest part for the us was the way they could never fight on their own terms, any fight they got into was initiated by the gooks with superior firepower.Especially with air assaults where slicks were easily be downed by hidden hmg's when they were landing or on gun runs or any low flying or loiter for that matter. My opinion would be to integrate heavier weapons and armor whenever available for normal patrols to try and stop patrols being easy targets. They should be able to fight for an extended period and not have to rely on air support to stop them being overrun ; obviously this is difficult in dense jungle. I would also say that the QRF's could have been larger to allow them to respond and capitalize on engagements and enemy ambushes.

Overall i would try and move away from the reliance on helicopters and air assaults. I would use them for Qrf and air support only so they completely remove the frightful landings of air assaults.

Lastly the intelligence of the Vietnam war was poor and unreliable, I cant really think of a solution for this. Maybe more lrrp's or infiltration.

>>35111717
I know you're referring to that famous picture of a captured guerilla getting shot in the head with a snubnose. What exactly is the formal name of that picture again?

>>35111913
They also needed to reduce collateral damage so not to piss off the locals. Remove any reason to be a viet cong; maybe set up outposts in villages to police and monitor the people. Essentially an occupation force with minimal interference.

One of the large problems is that there wasn't really a reason for the the vietneese to dislike the cong or could do nothing to stop them, its very similar to Afghanistan really. There wasnt enough of a presence to get people to co operate without the level of force and brutality the cong were willing to use.

Treat the Tet Offensive as an actual threat

>>35096923
Vietnam is by all acounts a "good"country right now. We trade with them. We get along just fine with them. The vietnam war was an utter waste.

File: WO3A_0003_MetalGearSolid.jpg (402KB, 1500x700px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1500x700px

>>35095197
unironically metal gear

File: sigint.jpg (14KB, 480x381px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x381px

>>35113489

>bi-pedal walking tank

it'll never catch on.

>>35113489
>barring the nuke
>bi-pedal tank with the ability to launch nukes

File: 44b.png (270KB, 600x436px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 600x436px

>All these apparently red-bloodes Americans assmad that dirt farmers who were invaded by the most powerful military on earth under false pretenses in order to squash a popular political movement after already kicking out another occupying force fought dirty.

You people beat off to the idea of some Red Dawn shit then clutch your fucking pearls that our full potential as an evil empire wasn't reached while we occupied a county that literally dindu nuffin to us.

I don't give a shit if they're 18 year-old conscripts with a family and girl back home I'm getting them out of my fucking country by any means necessary and if you can't accept that the Vietnamese had the same mentality then you have the reasoning skills of a toddler.

>>35113428
That's easy to say with 20/20 hindsight

>>35111600
Gencide the South Vietnamese

>>35095197
Having some guts would have sufficed.

Americans have no staying power.

File: 1504636420013.png (246KB, 534x462px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 534x462px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS3_hT_FUNQ

:45

>>35111717
>>35111940
i dunno, but last i heard the officer who executed the cop killer (that's what the guy was caught doing, murdering police and their families) was living in CA and owned a restaurant or something before he was outed and had to move.

>>35113579
>giving a fuck about ventilating communists
for what purpose?
besides, vietnam was just an excuse for a massive live fire exercise anyway.

Hubert Humphrey

>>35095197

I intend to make a thread talking about how I know nowhere near enough about airpower but.....

Surely the answer is no?

As I understand it, jungle terrain is the only thing that still adeptly resists the "see, shoot, kill" cycle that has been available to aircraft since electronic targetting became possible. It's just TOO HARD to pin down pack-animal based logisitics taking place under jungle cover - again this is only as far as I understand it. Adopting a different infantry rifle or something would, as anyone who knows ground combat will tell you, have done virtually fucking nothing. A tiny amount of difference in the tiny amount of enemy casualties casued by SMALL ARMS fire would have done nothing.

Frankly, I'm not even sure nukes would have sufficed unless you were willing to really pour it on. Which they wouldn't.

As people have already noted - the real "weapon" that would have won the war would have been a volunteer military and enough pressure at home to continue to fuck the enemy up until they GAVE up. It was attritional but for all that, america had the fucking material to WIN.

>>35095300
As someone else has said, wopuld you unironically say the soviets won in afghanistan? Don't be a fucking retard. To win a war means "to achieve my political objective". The objective was, at minimum, to arrested communist insurgency in the south. Not kill fifty gorillion rice niggers.

Fool.

>>35098163

What is this a pic of?

>>35114422
>not giving a fuck about ventilating communists

Hello antifa

>>35115773
Mother of a sailor on the Kursk who went off on some Russian government/navy dudes during a press briefing so they had her sedated.

>>35115778
Antifa are communists, this comment makes no sense

>>35114422
>not realizing the vietnamese anti-colonialist movement was far more nationalist than communist
>it's ok to murder people who disagree

as usual this board is overrun by children and edgelords