Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
August1991

The Vietnam War

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Mike Utinne said:

Why didn't Canada stop this war?

 

Because Canada wanted to make billions of dollars on war materials....like defoliants, napalm, munitions, generators, uniforms, etc...and that is exactly what Canada did.

K' ching !

 

https://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/supplying-the-war-machine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once Diem was deposed, the Americans were actually fighting the good fight, because in the wake of the internal putsch in the North, they weren't fighting the Viet Minh, but rather a monstrous Stalinist regime backed by the Maoist Chinese.

The mistake was chasing the fight inland with Search & Destroy when the Americans could have just stayed in the cities and waited for the NVA to mass, then bomb them into oblivion with Arc Light.

If Creighton Abrams had been in command from the get go, the war effort could have been sustained until the North lost Soviet and Chinese support with the onset of Detente.

When Nixon deescalated the Cold War, the Soviets and Chinese lost interest in Vietnam, but the Democrats had already lost the war before Nixon could fix it.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 10:16 PM, Dougie93 said:

The thing to understand is that North Vietnam was not a monolith.

.....

How clueless can one be?

======

The "Vietnam War" is better described as the "Battle of Vietnam" since it was one fight in a larger "Cold War" that America ultimately won.

Evidence?

The Soviet Union no longer exists.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2019 at 5:06 AM, Mike Utinne said:

Why didn't Canada stop this war?

Because like many Westerners at the time, we were confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2019 at 12:33 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

Because Canada wanted to make billions of dollars on war materials....

 

Disagree.

=====

We simply didn't see the threat. I understood it later in life, once I had travelled behind the Iron Curtain, spoken to people.

Trudeau Snr/Nixon were wrong. Reagan/Thatcher - like Churchill with Hitler - dealt with it correctly.

(By nature, Canadians prefer that everyone get along.)

=====

I reckon that Nixon had no political principle - except winning. (IMHO, he's the ideal politician.)

Trudeau Snr, unlike Nixon, had a political principle - which justified him in Canada.

In either case, both were wrong on the world scene.

As I say, both Nixon and Trudeau Snr were wrong. Detente was wrong. The Soviet Union is now no more.

Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were correct.

 

 

  

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2019 at 1:55 PM, Answer me please said:

 

Were you also confused when the US invaded Iraq?

At the time, I thought that Bush Jnr was wrong to invade Iraq.

Why?

Iraq, like Canada, is a complicated place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2019 at 2:55 AM, August1991 said:

How clueless can one be?

One has to be pretty clueless about North Vietnam if they don't realize that it was not a monolith but rather divided into factions, eventually coalescing into a Soviet backed faction led by Ho Chi Minh which was deposed by a Chinese backed faction led by Party 1st Secretary Le Duan, who turned out to be the Stalin of Indochina.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese however turned out to be too radical for even Le Duan, when they backed Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, at which point the North Vietnamese flipped back to the Soviets and went to war with the Khmer Rouge who used all the North Vietnamese tactics which they had used against the Americans, back against the North Vietnamese, who were now in the position of the invaders.

This then led to a direct confrontation between the Chinese and Vietnam when China invaded Vietnam in 1979.

The belief that the Communists were one big monolith, rather than them actually being sworn enemies in fact, is called the Domino Theory.

Which was the reason the United States got involved in the first place, under the Eisenhower Administration.

Ike having invented said Domino Theory,  at a press conference on 7 April 1954.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

So Ike improvised the term ?

Well the concept that the Communists were a monolith which was going to spread relentlessly predates the Domino Theory itself, but Ike was the first to invoke the Dominoes, when speaking about the situation in Indochina regarding the French Indochinese War against the Viet Minh to justify why America was backing the French.

"Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the "falling domino" principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have a beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences." ~ General Eisenhower, 7 April 1954

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was complete nonsense of course, but when the Supreme Allied Commander from the Second World War invoked it, that made it the gospel once and for all time

It persists still by the way, because the American position in the Middle East now is still the Domino Theory, Jimmy Carter simply rebranded it as the Carter Doctrine in 1979 in the face of another Dien Bien Phu type crisis with the Iranian Revolution, and Iran remains the North Vietnam of the Middle East to this hour in fact.

The Saudis are of course the ARVN, similarly unable to fight their way out of a wet paper bag in Yemen no matter how much American kit they are given.

That's not actually fair to the ARVN, the Americans gave the ARVN a bad rap because the Americans needed scapegoats, the ARVN were honestly much better troops than the Saudis, the Saudis are frikkin pathetic.

That's actually another Big Lie in Vietnam, that the South Vietnamese wouldn't fight.

It was more nuanced than that, the South Vietnamese simply refused to chase the National Liberation Front through the jungle stepping on booby traps as they went.

The ARVN wasn't hardcore enough for that, only the American troops were that disciplined.

But each time Le Duan launched one his big offensives against the cities on the coast, which was every four years, 64', 68', 72' and they went early in 75', the ARVN fought hard to defend the cities, although it was lost cause in 75' and once the NVA was at the gates the ARVN packed it in.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...