America Won the Vietnam War ! - Yes you heard right.

Originally posted by esecallum
I
In Vietnam we killed 6000000 Vietnamese.They killed only 58000 Americans.

So you think that killing people is a "winning" situation....thats just ridiculous

In fact America by this definition has won every single war because we kill more.

We always kill more.

When you redefine winning by body count America always wins.

Always.

Hitler killed millions of Jews....did he win anything?

More recently in Irak 5000 Americans have been killed but have managed to kill a million of them terrorists...

This means each American can kill at least a 100 terrorists!!!

How many innocent people did America kill.....how many british and Canadian troops did they also kill by accident.

This shows America is the technological master.

Thats why the American economy is so strong right now

We don't even need to use nukes since we are masters of weaponary.

No, actually, America is the master of arrogance, you, personally of the master of....well its against the T & C's to tell you

This would actually make us Americans gods since we would have the power of life and death against all those would dare attack us.

You're seriosuly starting to get annoy me now...... and by the way, China would completely destroy you if they wanted to attack

Ignorance

This make me proud to be an American.

I hold up my head high when i walk the street.

My heart swells with pride.

I know we are the dominant force.

We are on the way up and will rise to the very zenith of creation.

So it makes you proud when your government goes to other countries and kills millions of people? You like seeing innocent kids, that are accidently caught in the crossfire, lose limbs....you enjoy seeing infants with burns to over 75% of their body....you like seeing countries, that are your allies being blown to bits by friendly fire.

And by the way, if you won the Vietnam war, why is Vietnam still a communist country.



Ive been here 2 years, and this is the most ignorant post Ive ever read

[edit on 13/8/2009 by OzWeatherman]

reply to post by esecallum



First off your numbers are way off!

Second. Winning battles even if you win all of them doesn't guarantee victory.

Third. This is exactly the type of trash talk that gives us a bad reputation.

Fourth. When does school start again?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e47ab2990ac5.png[/atsimg]

[edit on 13-8-2009 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by OzWeatherman


They always attack us first.We are defending.USA does not fire first.We have rules of engagement.

America saved Europe from Hitler,Comminists,Terrorists.We gave you Marchall Plan Aid.This is how you repay us?

Churchil was on his knees begging USA to save you lot.You were down to your last bullet.We sent you food parcels,clothes,logistical support.


You are ungrateful.

Remember AMERICA IS THE ONLY INVINCIBLE BASTION OF FREEDOM.

Without America it would be over run by barbarians.

Originally posted by esecallum
reply to post by OzWeatherman

 

They always attack us first.We are defending.USA does not fire first.We have rules of engagement.

Sorry, where exactly did the Vietnamese attack you?? Last time I heard, Vietnamese soil was in Vietnam

America saved Europe from Hitler,Comminists,Terrorists.We gave you Marchall Plan Aid.This is how you repay us?

Churchil was on his knees begging USA to save you lot.You were down to your last bullet.We sent you food parcels,clothes,logistical support.

1. Im not english, Im Australian
2. Like usual, you were only interested in helping your allies, when it benifitted you

You are ungrateful.

Remember AMERICA IS THE ONLY INVINCIBLE BASTION OF FREEDOM.

Without America it would be over run by barbarians.

No one is invincible fool. Anyone that thinks that usually ends up crushed....ie Romans, Hitler

And according to the general ATS population, america at the moment is vulnerable

Originally posted by esecallum
They always attack us first.We are defending.USA does not fire first.We have rules of engagement.

Ever hear of Gulf of Tonkin incident? It was the catalyst for the Americans to give themselves justification to attack the North Vietnamese. Unfortunately, it was a total fabrication of the truth.

America saved Europe from Hitler,Comminists,Terrorists.We gave you Marchall Plan Aid.This is how you repay us?

Last time I checked, it was the Soviets who destroyed the Nazis in WWII while the US helped defend the UK on one front and fought their own war with Japan on the other.

But I guess the Soviets were just evil communists that should be destroyed, right? They only covered about 1/3 of the globe at their peak but obviously 1/3 of the world's population is not able to think for themselves like you can, right?

Remember AMERICA IS THE ONLY INVINCIBLE BASTION OF FREEDOM.

Without America it would be over run by barbarians.

haha, freedom. The only freedom you know is the freedom that your government says it gives you. When I look to the US, I see a government that can access every aspect of their people's lives because their people choose to be part of a major system of thought control. I'm afraid to go to the US because the freedoms that I exploit everyday here in Canada are not so free five minutes miles south of my current position.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


You should really brush up on your history,

Ever hear of Gulf of Tonkin incident? It was the catalyst for the Americans to give themselves justification to attack the North Vietnamese. Unfortunately, it was a total fabrication of the truth.

The viet nam war was in full swing long before the gulf of tonkin resolution.
In 1957 400 southern government officials were assasinated by the communist insurgancy.
In 1959 the NV central commitee authorized full scale military opperations in the south and began to move troops and material into the south via the Ho Chi Min trail.

It was also the communist NV that invaded laos and cambodia first and instigated viloent communist revolutions in those countries.
Not even going to get into the terrible attrocities that the khmer rouge perpetrated on its own people.

The funny thing is in the end the NV never achieved more than what was originally intended for them to have, a fully united viet nam.

If the french and british had just allowed the vietnamese self determination to begin with this whole sorry affair could have been avoided.

A lot of people seem to forget that communism was spread at the end of a gun barrel, and not through popular action of the people supposedly liberated by the communists.
For all ther terrrible things that happened during the conflict why is it that the communsits get a pass for all of the atrocities they commited, and against their own people.

Last time I checked, it was the Soviets who destroyed the Nazis in WWII while the US helped defend the UK on one front and fought their own war with Japan on the other.

But I guess the Soviets were just evil communists that should be destroyed, right? They only covered about 1/3 of the globe at their peak but obviously 1/3 of the world's population is not able to think for themselves like you can, right?

Without the almost impossibley huge amount of material assistance that the us gave the soviet union during the war, they would have lost.

I suggest that you do alittle reading about this little thing called the lend lease program.

With out the 400,000 trucks supplied by the us, or 1,000 locamotives and the 15,000 rail cars, how many soviet soldiers would actually have made it from the safety of siberia to the front.
Or how many guns , and planes would they have had to fight with without the entire factories we built and shipped to the USSR.
Or the millions of tons of food stuff and clothing and other simple items required to keep an army functional, that the us supplied.

I dont recall there being any soviet bombers pounding the german industrial might into submission. And making sure they couldnt supply the troops on the eastern front.

I dont recall any soviet ships making any useful contributions to destrying the germany navy, the same germany navy that was destroyed to ensure the safe delivery of materials to our allies.


some people also seem to forget that in many places in occupied soviet territory the germans were seen as liberators from stalins rule, until they started to kill off people indiscriminately.




Interestingly enough the modern russian airforce acknowledges the contribution of lend lease
Russian airforce site about the Lend Lease.
lend-lease.airforce.ru...

But I guess the Soviets were just evil communists that should be destroyed, right? They only covered about 1/3 of the globe at their peak but obviously 1/3 of the world's population is not able to think for themselves like you can, right?

Yah right, what happened to soviet communism? Oh thats right it fell apart.

That 1/3 of the people you claim, didnt have a choice at being communists, or have you forgotten that the soviets absorbed several independant nations, formented violent revolutions in many others. And foced the sattelite states into submission through force of arms.

Or have you not learned that lenninist/stalinist ussr's goal was world domination.


Come on and stopp with the drivel.












[edit on 14-8-2009 by punkinworks09]

[edit on 14-8-2009 by punkinworks09]

Originally posted by punkinworks09
The viet nam war was in full swing long before the gulf of tonkin resolution.
In 1957 400 southern government officials were assasinated by the communist insurgancy.
In 1959 the NV central commitee authorized full scale military opperations in the south and began to move troops and material into the south via the Ho Chi Min trail.

What did the US have to do with NVA vs SVietnam before Gulf of Tonkin? I was pointing out the reason how the US got itself involved, and the reason why was to stop the spread of global communism. I'm quite aware that the NVA was already fighting before the US got involved, otherwise the US wouldn't have much of a reason to interfere (common sense I assumed).

A lot of people seem to forget that communism was spread at the end of a gun barrel, and not through popular action of the people supposedly liberated by the communists.
For all ther terrrible things that happened during the conflict why is it that the communsits get a pass for all of the atrocities they commited, and against their own people.

I'm sure just as many people died at the end of gun barrels for the sake of "democratic liberation", specifically by the US. The only difference is that American democracy really means the rich get the power and Soviet communism is when the peasants have their turn to rule.

Without the almost impossibley huge amount of material assistance that the us gave the soviet union during the war, they would have lost.

I suggest that you do alittle reading about this little thing called the lend lease program.

I'm quite aware of the program. It did indeed provide assistance to the Soviets. However, you are very misguided if you think that American support was enough to even make a dent in the Soviet war effort. Whatever American assistance given to the Soviets was just a benefit from the Yalta conference and considering the big three all foresaw the cold war, no serious assistance was granted.

Did the US provide the USSR with its millions of conscripts? What about their massive tank forces? Their guns? The US gave the Soviets assistance just like how the Soviets gave the US assistance, but neither gave the other anything very important.

The Soviets survived being raped on their home soil by the Nazi elite armies and they managed to scramble as much war resources and soldiers together as possible and launched a bloody but effective counter strike to take back their ruins of cities. They won with their cheap and effective technology and brutal tactics, plus the occasional talents (Soviet snipers with over 500 kills, you can't go wrong with that).

On top of their counter attack, they regrouped with their new T-34 battle groups and steamrolled all the way to Berlin while the Nazis froze their balls off because they were not allowed to surrender to such "subhumans". The Russians proved their ability to match a much powerful enemy with specialized tactics that always adapted to the warzone, as opposed to a standard.

Interestingly enough the modern russian airforce acknowledges the contribution of lend lease
Russian airforce site about the Lend Lease.
lend-lease.airforce.ru...

Who said it never happened? It's part of history. It's just not a big of deal as you make it sound.

Yah right, what happened to soviet communism? Oh thats right it fell apart.

That 1/3 of the people you claim, didnt have a choice at being communists, or have you forgotten that the soviets absorbed several independant nations, formented violent revolutions in many others. And foced the sattelite states into submission through force of arms.

Or have you not learned that lenninist/stalinist ussr's goal was world domination.

Come on and stopp with the drivel.

Dude, you're being extremely hypocritical of your own American views. If you think the US does not regularly engage in violence to force it's unilateral views on the rest of the world, then I feel sorry for you.

The Soviets were top of their game until they got hung up trying to landgrab Afghanistan. They lost that conflict not because they were inadequate, but because Afghanistan will never be conquered by a single force. The Soviet politburo decided that it would be arrogant for their superpower to carry on with such outdated views (rebellion is so 20th century) and decided to reform their country.

They did not collapse, they simply restructured for the better of their people. Of course with the break up of something as major as the Soviet Union, there were many problems in the transition. Internal nationalist forces wanted to continue the Soviet wet dream, breakaway states wanted as much independence and weapons as possible, and external factors like the CIA destroyed the Russian economy to ensure that Russia would not become another threat to their global power.

So really, believe what you want. I believe that Russia designed itself to be more free and modern from obselete Soviet ideals. As I look at Russia today, I see the vision that was made 20 years ago coming true. It has a rising economy, it controls a vast amount of energy, it has a strong and traditional culture, it continues to develop new technology, and it is modernizing its vast military. To me, that is the rebirth of a modern superpower while its rival has hit its full potential years ago and is now starting to fall.

Wars are won in the minds of your enemies... so No, we didn't win.

reply to post by esecallum[/url]

What utter, sensless tripe! In all my life, I have never, ever seen such drivle!

You Sir, are an insult to humanity and to your country.

One can only hope that somebody, perhaps a family member, will take hold of you by the scruff of the neck and deliver a smack to the back of your head!

Hopefully, this will have two effects.

One, it would shut you up, if only for the moment!

Two, it would dislodge that pea you call a brain and cause it to hurtle round that empty space between your ears.

It may even create a spark of decency.

As to your assumption that body counts win wars, then I guess that a certain Robert E Lee won the American Civil War. By your own admission the enemy dead count towards victories.

If you research the individual battles that were fought during the Cival War, it transpires that the South killed more of the North than vice versa!

Originally posted by fritz
reply to post by esecallum[/url]


Two, it would dislodge that pea you call a brain and cause it to hurtle round that empty space between your ears.

It may even create a spark of decency.

As to your assumption that body counts win wars, then I guess that a certain Robert E Lee won the American Civil War. By your own admission the enemy dead count towards victories.

If you research the individual battles that were fought during the Cival War, it transpires that the South killed more of the North than vice versa!

You are very rude.However I will let it pass.

i have studied this.

I can prove that i am right.

body count is the only way to define victory as far as America is concerned.

your example of Robert E Lee is invalid as that happened eons ago and is no longer relevant.you are talking about people with arrows and muskets and knives.

I daresay you will starting quoting prehistoric dinosaurs next.

The body count definition of victory only applies after 1945 as prior to that it was a different era.you know what era means?

as explained to you by others in vietnam we won every battle.we destroyed and caused huge damage.we acted with impunity.we were clearly the masters.

we strode with giant strides across the landscape.we imported our culture right into the enemies heartland.

the vietcong were cowering behind bushes in the dirt while we relaxed in cafes. we even had our own brothels.

suppose you kill everyone of the opposing side.suppose you kill all of them.have you won or not?

answer me.

eh?

reply to post by esecallum[/url]

So 50,000 dead Americans, fellow countrymen, mean very little to you do they?

It is a crying shame that they had to die in vain then, because when
'your' victorious forces quit the country they had all but slaughtered, the funny little men in black pyjamas rose up from the dead and helped the NVA take the South.

In my book, that Sir is not a victory. Period. No amount of spinning will make the US win the Viet Nam War.

reply to post by esecallum


Could I point you to a book : Ape and Essence by Alduous Huxley.

New Zealand is definitely a country you should be worried about.

SOG along the trail enjoyed a 100:1 to 150:1 kill ratio.

But you misunderstand what war is.

War is two sides killing each other until one side is unable to kill further, or unwilling to get killed further. The faster you kill, the quicker you reach that "magic" number that only your opponent knows.

It's not a tally sheet. Nor statistical analysis. It's not even who holds the field when it's over.

It's deriving a goal by killing.

The US was out of Viet Nam when it fell. All ground forces were out in 1972. When Viet Nam fell, it was from an invasion by the North using regular forces in 1975.

The North invaded in 1972 when there was only one brigade of the First Cav and the 196th, and the NVA were slaughtered.

The guerrillas didn't accomplish much of anything, and were effectively rendered inert in 1968.

Viet Nam served it's purpose, just like we have had a lot of gains as a result of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Think.

The technologies that have been rushed and interjected, the skills tens of thousands of American soldiers have gained, more comprehensive tactics have been developed, new explosives, new weapons, new surveillance technologies - on and on.

You don't have to completely win a war to win.

Just be happy with your kills.

Always worked for me.

Originally posted by ShadeWolf
Sorry, but that post might be the dumbest thing I've read in a while. By that logic the Nazis won WWII because they killed between 6 and 12 million people. Killing is not the objective of a war, the true objective is to liberate and conquer.

Agreed.. but the prize actually goes to the Japanese. China alone had 20 million deaths at the Japanese Yasukuni-Jinjya temple blood Plaque (And they has BDSM fun doing it). Not counting other parts of Asia.

Jeeez, according to this guy - The Japs won WWII.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by mobydog]

Originally posted by warrenb
reply to post by esecallum

 

I thought I was immune to pointless ignorant posts but I guess not.
This is up there with the least intelligent threads of all time.

Don't quit your day job...if you have one.

Agreed, I didn't even know people who visited ATS could dream up (snip) like this (snip-snip).

reply to post by pizzaguy


I agree that in war we all do not win. For example, I represent several individuals in VA cases. It is amazing that in the Vietnam theater, we had bases in Thailand, Laos and action in Cambodia. The vets that fought in these other areas are having a hell of a time getting benefits.

Part of the problem is a function on requiring the vets to prove they were injured in theater, combined with destroying many of the vets records in a fire in Maryland I think, and then failing to give full records of actions in theater. The problem is compounded by the continued failure to fully declassify documents such as the CHEKO report, and manipulating the Ranch Hand document; proven by Dr. Philip Mikalek in 2000, when he admitted as such.

It is hard to say you won a war when the fighters of that war are denied justice, data and the proper hearings.

thats the stupidest thing ive ever read.

by your logic, in a fight, the winner is the man who threw 2 punches, but is laying on his back unconscious, because the other guy only threw 1 punch.

Originally posted by mobydog

Originally posted by ShadeWolf
Sorry, but that post might be the dumbest thing I've read in a while. By that logic the Nazis won WWII because they killed between 6 and 12 million people. Killing is not the objective of a war, the true objective is to liberate and conquer.

Agreed.. but the prize actually goes to the Japanese. China alone had 20 million deaths at the Japanese Yasukuni-Jinjya temple blood Plaque (And they has BDSM fun doing it). Not counting other parts of Asia.

Jeeez, according to this guy - The Japs won WWII.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by mobydog]

learn to read.i said this law applies only after 1945.

Your examples don't count as were before 1945.

understood?

[edit on 19-8-2009 by esecallum]

Originally posted by esecallum


learn to read.i said this law applies only after 1945.

Your examples don't count as were before 1945.

understood?

[edit on 19-8-2009 by esecallum]

Oh yeah very good......your twisting it so it fits in with your own ideals and point of view

I smell troll poo

Give it up, everyone thinks your a nutcase

reply to post by esecallum


No words for you.......