So wait, how did America, a super power, get its ass kicked in Vietnam? How hard is it to fight against jungle monkeys?
>>1346230
The U.S. 'Operation Rolling Thunder' was the turning point that lost the war.
>>1346230
It didn't
>>1346236
No.
It was combat effective through the war, but without diplomacy to actually control the borders, the enemies received infinite weapons and supplies from china and russia. They would have jeeded to agent orange a quarter mile deep strip along a border and make a trump style wall with riflemen on it
>>1346230
Lack of public support and political will to expand the conflict. America stayed on the defensive the entire time and barely touched the north. The north, despite being solidly beaten in pretty much every battle, failed to collapse as the US hoped it would and after the US left with a peace treaty there was no political will to keep fighting when north vietnam invaded the south again
If the US had actually invaded north vietnam the war would have been over in 6 months, but they didnt want to risk escalating the conflict and bringing russia or china into it
>>1346230
No one is invincible, there's always a way or combination of factors to fuck your enemy's shit up.
>>1346230
> So wait, how did America, a super power, get its ass kicked in Vietnam? How hard is it to fight against jungle monkeys?
My grandpa went to Vietnam. He kicked ass. Then Americans ran away and he won.
Any other questions?
>>1346230
the jungle monkeys waste your time and money, whilst recieving tons of support from comintern nations, and from sympathetic elements in your own nation.
this combined with your military trying to sugarcoat everything, and disregarding effective COIN tactics in favor of meme shit like kill counters makes it very hard to win.
>>1346258
Most of the aid the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam received from the People's Republic of China and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, prior to Op. RT was not in the form of grants, but had to be paid for. Riceballs and fishhead sauce only go so far. This put the Vietnamese in the position of going to the USSR & the PRoC hat in hand saying please can we have some aid.
Op. RT changed that. Suddenly you had airplanes (B-52 & FB-111) specifically designed to drop nuclear bombs on Russian cities available for the Russians to practice on, without putting their own territory at risk. Same goes for the PRoC. NOw it was the Russians and the Chinese going to the Vietnamese hat in hand saying please can we help you shoot down those planes? And how much do you want for the wreckage we can salvage? And the pilots, navigators ,bombadiers, radar oprerators, etc that come down on your territory? You know, the ones trained to drop bombs on our cities? How much do you want for them?
>>1346284
>disregarding effective COIN tactics in favor of meme shit like kill counters
Can you explain this?
>>1346295
> Can you explain this?
I don't think this possible, seeing his belief in "comintern nation" during Vietnam.
American education at it's finest.
>>1346295
there was a program wherein a US force would embed themselves into a local village, and basically be based there for months at a time. during this time, the americans would conduct patrols, build infrastructure, and protect the village from VC infiltration. this would lead to the locals trusting the americans, (since they lived amongst them), and subsequently not backstabbing them by giving info to any VC/NVA personnel.
one of the key things to winning against an insurgency is to starve support for the insurgents.
if the locals believe you can protect them, they will act in their own best interest and support you.
>>1346288
1. The U.S. long had aircraft in the war before rolling t
2. The soviets always lent aircraft and pilots to these wars, see korea.
3. The soviets were lending migs earlier in the war as well. Infamously, the navy had an ace before the air force did (they got theirs around the time of oprt)
The soviets just upped their game when they smellt blood
>>1346301
woops, sorry, coomunist nations such as the USSR and PRC.
>>1346316
B-52s & FB-111s did not operate north of the DMZ prior to Op RT, and these were the planes the Russians cared about.
The USSR did not 'lend' aircraft to the DRoV-N prior to Op RT
. Any Russian aircraft supplied, and they were few, were paid for one way or another.
Navy rules for reaching ace status were easier than AF rules.
The same reason we're "losing" in the Middle East.
It's unpopular, it's against an enemy that isn't really defined as far as states go, and it's terribly expensive. To train an average marine, you are already putting forward about $50,000 alone. Compare that with a shepherd who goes to a boot camp for 3 months for free because "it's for God." and then is equipped with an AK-47 if they were good enough or "selected" for martyrdom and loaded up with explosives. if they weren't.
>>1346358
>Compare that with a shepherd who goes to a boot camp for 3 months for free because "it's for God."
I mean, its not exactly free for the organization training him.
>>1346362
no, but you sure as hell aren't going to be paying him top dollar for his service.
We were winning, despite all appearances and handicaps..
The Tet Offensive was a tactical and strategic disaster for the VietCong and North Vietnam. The VC stopped being a fighting force as of that operation.
Though a few american reporters on the safe big bases got some dust in their drink during it. So they reported it as being this huge loss for the Americans. Which finally pushed the general public towards hating the war. Making Tet a political loss for the Americans.
We could have won the war before Tet. Just needed permission to destroy their air fields and lay mines in their harbors. Effectively crippling the North's ability to fight.
>>1346230
Because killing people en mass is a real shit way to convert people away from anti-western sentiment and their own nationalism.
By the last year of that war, more than half of the vietnamese shooting at us had no ties to the VC. We'd just killed too many random gooks, and well, blood cries out for blood. We'd inspired, spawned, and brought into power far more radical communist groups in the surrounding area than were there when we started to boot (such as the Khmer Rouge.)
Vietnam already hated western colonists after dealing with the French, so even before we went in, there was simply no military solution.
But when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts looking like a nail.
...and it's happening all over again with "The War on Terror". The more you fight it, the worse it becomes. The mujahideen, the muslim brotherhood, hamas, the taliban, al qaeda... ISIS is just the latest tip of a never ending iceberg, all because we didn't learn dick from Vietnam.
>>1346366
Chances are he himself will be paying for AK and training (judging by the Donbass militia).
>>1346341
Ussr was really a pathetic, shit ally. Its funny a communist country works at mercenaries whereas capitalist countries operated for free, although this was different in south america.
>>1346437
> whereas capitalist countries operated for free
Uh. No.
We were protecting our investments.
>>1346366
you think is guys are fighting for free?
they get paid weekly you dumbass they are not as deus vult as you may think
>>1346484
Its why ISIS collects taxes from people living within their territory.
>>1346495
Thats un noteworthy. Business is potatoe out there. What isnt, is selling oil on the black market to sanctioned countries and also selling drugs.
>>1346524
didn't they also sell historical artifacts stolen from archeological sites and museums?
>>1346382
Except the US' strategy was based on using South Viet soldiers to garrison villages and protect them from the Vietcong. You're talking out of your ass when you say that it was Yanks killing Viets in droves. They wanted Western boots on the ground because otherwise the Vietcong would just come in and force them to feed their men and let them hide in their villages.
>>1346230
Simply because Vietnamese were better fighters than American faggots
MUH K/D RATIO
>>1346548
except no
they just had more fighting spirit
>>1346556
Dont overpurchase into memes. Their morale was impressivally high, which was probably a combination of their cause and executing defectors. But thats not much higher than normal soldiers, who were theatened with prison time but paid money for service.
>it's another "let's pretend that the US pulling out of Vietnam is tantamount to Vietnamese conquering the continental USA" thread
The USA pulled out because it didn't want to waste any more lives and money.
'Gimme shelter' just came on the radio
Because the Homefront was collapsing, and that's how Russia became communist
Do you even know how to wage war
>be in vietnam
>fortunate son by creedence clearwater revival comes on
>>1346230
Americans were outmatched in firepower by the Vietnamese (As they always are) but this time they couldn't use artillery or airpower to hide the fact that they have a really retarded doctrine.
>Hur Dur Muh Riflemen
>>1346588
>Americans were outmatched in firepower by the Vietnamese (As they always are) but this time they couldn't use artillery or airpower to hide the fact that they have a really retarded doctrine.
can you back this shit up in anyway?
>>1346731
Nowhere does this say that the Americans were "outmatched in firepower", only that the NVA would ambush American forces and suppress them until the Americans could call in air cover.
>>1346588
>>1346731
Americans had well over 5 times as much firepower than the NVA, but it was worthless during the night, and the nva would also try and work around it. They would wait until enemies were ins suicide range or try to get into suicide range. In addition, from the korean war their leaders learned to sniff the blood of weakened divisions, and they would try to use those to break enemy lines.
The firepower was too much though, and the forest also worked against them sometimes. If you are at night in a jungle, it's extremely hard to 100%-0% them, all you can do it break the unit and force retreat/hiding. Pair that with m60's and other assualt rifles lasting long into battles and the vietnam war had nearly zero 100%-0% on any battalions, whereas in the korean war it was common that over 1,000 men (an entire battalion) would die in battle after being surrounded by the chinese
>>1346548
>Simply because Vietnamese were better fighters than American faggots
>lose millions of more soldiers
>lose the entirety of your non-uniformed combatants in a single offensive
>better fighters
Lolno.
>>1346561
You're retarded. Morale was excessively low during Vietnam and this isn't even disputable. Soldiers were constantly disheveled, out of regs, doing drugs, just fucked up all over the place. When higher ups told Sergeants to go on on patrol, it wasn't uncommon to get a "No" out of them. Meanwhile, when an NVA soldier told a VC combatant to go fucking die they went and did it.
>>1346877
> >lose millions of more soldiers
Vietnamese went extinct, I guess.
Any reports of human activity are due to necromantic rituals practiced by communists. Seeing as communists routinely kill all the population of their nations several times over, commonly practiced and perfected.
>>1346230
They had soviet snd Chinese helping them
>>1346230
Hippies and tv
>>1346954
Between 1,156,000 and 3,207,000 dead Vietnamese.
Between 440,000 and 757,000 being VC military.
vs. 58,315 dead US soldiers, largely by friendly fire.
Vietnam's total population being over 30 million at the time.
So yeah, not really extinct. Though if the goal had been extinction, maybe we woulda stood a chance.
>>1347006
> Between 1,156,000 and 3,207,000 dead Vietnamese.
That's from both sides, you doofus.
>>1346382
You bought into way too many memes anon. WAY too many. The amount of soldiers the NVA could field in an open battle was meaningless.
>>1347011
Hence the second line, and the last.
>>1347023
> millions more
You can kill yourself.
>>1346230
The U.S. killled way more enemy troops compared to what they lost. They left because there was no realistic military goal to obtain.
>>1346230
US was holding NVA/Vietcong back and keeping the south free, but democrats voted to end military "bullet for a bullet" support and S. Vietnam was promptly taken
>>1347028
Maybe should have made it clear I'm not the guy that made that claim - just saying one could wipe out millions of Vietnamese, and they'd be in no danger of extinction - just really pissed.
ass kicked implies the armed forces were defeated
this is not the case
the civilian leadership lost the will to fight, and the north vietnamese never ceased their aggression, regardless of the tens of the hundreds of thousands of soldiers they sent to their end, so the fruitless venture was halted.
>>1346954
Jesus, that's one hell of a strawman you've built. Last I checked, 3 million is, in fact, millions more than 50,000, but my math is a little rusty.
Vietnam War memes on /his/ and /k/
1. We never really tried!
2. HCM wasn't even a communist!
3. We could have nuked them!
4. They were about to surrender!
5. We didn't lose! It was the Democrats stopping the funding!
6. We signed the Paris Peace treaty! That proves we won!
7. McDonald's in Hanoi = Victory
8. Muh Kill/Death ratio!
9. We stopped the spread of Communism!
10. Vietnamese people are pro-American so we won in the long-run!
>>1346230
they won nearly every engagement, they lost the PR war at home.
the "anti-war" movement was largely genuine communist agitator groups duping the public into getting on the peace train, it's not hard to sell "war sucks" to normal people especially with a substantial casualty rate, if you go back and look at pictures and footage from demonstrations you'll see NVA/VC banners and communist paraphernalia. the "peace movement" in the West was Soviet influenced for decades mostly via the "World peace Council".
Also they signed an armistice with the North Vietnamese to end the war, who waited for them to leave then broke it immediately and steamrolled the ARVN in like a year.
>>1346584
>be in it aint me
>the chief points the cannon at you
>>1347036
>so the fruitless venture was halted.
in other words, the armed forces WERE defeated
>>1346230
American dead: 58,000
Dead gooks: 3,500,000
You can't win wars when your president a) doesn't let you fight to win, and b) surrenders and/or withdraws.
What happened in Vietnam happened in Iraq. Beat the shit out of the enemy on the ground, and watch the politicians piss away the victory.
>>1347505
no, they weren't
>>1347531
I think it's pretty stupid to compare vietnam to iraq in my opinion
>>1347531
>muh k/d
>>1347531
But the Wikipedia article lists 220,357 - 313,000 military dead for the ARVN and 444,000 - 1,100,000 military dead or missing for the NVA/VC.
By your logic the Americans stomped the Germans in WWII because we suffered 400k KIA and they suffered more than 3 million KIA.
>>1347564
Besides telling the world you're an idiot, what did your post add to the thread?
The Vietnamese would have fought for a thousand years.
The Americans leadership were more concerned with public opinion and ratings.
>>1347586
Who the fuck trusts wikipedia???
VIETNAM WAR KILLED 3.8 MILLION VIETNAMESE, NOT 2.1 MILLION? by mattsteinglass
June 20, 2008, 1:42 pm
Filed under: Vietnam, War
Reuters reports a new study published in the British Medical Journal finds the Vietnam War led to the violent deaths of 3.8 million Vietnamese between 1955 and 1984, rather than previous estimates of 2.1 million.
The new estimates relied on data from nationally representative population surveys done by the U.N. World Health Organization in these countries earlier this decade to calculate death tolls in wars waged from 1955 to 2002.
In most of the countries, this method pointed to much higher loss of life than broadly cited media estimates of the various war death counts had shown, the researchers said.
For example, the method indicated 3.8 million Vietnamese died in the protracted fighting in Vietnam, mostly from 1955 to 1975, compared to previous estimates cited by the researchers of 2.1 million.
>>1347531
> Dead gooks
Funny thing: half of them died fighting for US.
Unless you count them as murdered by American propaganda machine (i.e. deluded into fighting for their enemies), I don't see how they could be boosting kill ratio of America vs Vietnam.
>>1347602
> 3.8 million Vietnamese between 1955 and 1984
Frequent Wind happened in 1975.
>>1346564
Nigga u butt hurt
>>1346268
>America stayed on the defensive the entire time and barely touched the north
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rolling_Thunder
i would call a sustained bombing campaing against the north as "touching" it
>>1347588
>he needs to call others an idiot to satisfy his insecurity
Delet this
>>1346230
ALRIGHT LISTEN UP you smug liberal european faggots. America DID NOT LOSE the war in Vietnam. The proof of the FACT that USA won the war is clear: Vietnam is a shithole and USA is the greatest country in the world.
America achieved ALL its objectives in Vietnam, and we had had achieved all our objectives we went home to fuck the promqueen like we always do, like smug liberal faggots can only dream about doing.
Objectives achieved:
1. We kicked their ass
2. We spread freedom and democracy
3. We bombed the shit out of them
4. Over 1 million Vietnamese "people" died
Does this sound like a loss to you? Are you a fucking retard? Why do you hate America?
FACT: South Vietnam lost, sure ok I can admit that. But America? No, we won just like we always won.
Forget you faggy wikipedia, it might say "Result: North Vietnamese victory" but wikipedia is a notoriously anti-American propaganda website and that little piece of shit article was probably written by the fucking Kremlin.
In conclusion, all of you fucking smug european liberal communist jew nigger faggots can suck my dick because America was, is and always will be NUMBER FUCKING ONE.
>>1347006
thats entire death count including civilians.
then you have 200-300k south viet military casualties.
why does every american always seem to think it was u.s. vs v.c. only?
it was a civil war. fighting started before us joined and fighting continued after america left.
americans are always so butthurt about this war lol. if you were winning why did you leave? that makes no sense. what did you accomplish? stop the spread of communism? they took over the south almost immediantly. then they invaded cambodia. the khmer rouge were backed by the u.s. but they still lost to the vietnamese who captured their capitol and destroyed the k.r. in only 2 weeks. they then controlled cambodia until the 90's.
the americans relied on brute force, their tactics were incompetent as fuck. they were tricked and decieved at every turn. americans relied on torture for imformation which gave them unreliable and many times even false information. same thing happened in iraq which is why you constantly hear about u.s. troops raiding the wrong house. the vietcong had spies in the u.s. command rooms, they had spies shakin hands with high ranking generals. the vc knew everything about american troops. ever wonder why ambushes were so common? you lost because you were incompetant in every regard except pure force if the vc had as many weapons helis and bombers america would have been beyond humiliated.
>>1346230
Fighting in a dense jungle with no good reason to be there unlike the 2nd world war and some opportunistic entrepreneur pushing for direct impingement.
>>1346230
Won battles
Lost war
the end
Profits.
The war was fought so that the military industrial complex could make grotesque profits.
Just like Iraq, when the war became less profitable, we withdrew.
War is a racket.
>>1347899
Idiot.
2 years after we withdrew, Saigon falls to the NVA.
Sound like victory to anyone?
>>1348633
and the communist invasion of south vietnam had nothing to do with the involvement in the while thing
>>1348633
What a juvenile assessment.
>>1348639
> 2 years after we withdrew, Saigon falls to the NVA.
What are you talking about?
29th April, 1975 - final phase of withdrawal of US troops (Frequent Wind) begins
30th April, 1975 - Saigon falls
People were still evacuating, when Viet Cong took over the city.
>>1348618
/thr3ad
>>1346230
A foreign invader can't be in vietnam forever, but vietnam will be in vietnam forever.
It wasn't about winning battles or the killcount or anything like that. All the NVA had to do to win was to wait out the declining public support of the war in the US.
>>1348633
"""No"""
There were assets being defended, but the war was waay more expensive. It was more us investing in the region trying to stop capitalism.
The military industrial complex exists to keep military production on life support during peacetime so that the country can go to total war in a few months. What little profit is made from exports isnt worth the haggling power of having that army.
>>1350052
Stop communism*, an investment itself
>>1347476
someone should make a bingo for this
>american """"military""""
You want to know why? Ok I will tell you American forces were playing chess while the north Vietnamese were playing go the Americans were to focuses on the killing part and not the taking of objectives which is why they eventually pulled out does this answer you question
why don't you understand modern combat?
>>1350079
Damn..
>>1346230
American Army sucks and can't conquer a people who will never be conquered.
>>1346273
God bless the vietnamese
t. non imperialist American
>>1350079
Europeans in America should be deported.
>>1350079
Wonder why this ass skipped Serbia and Panima... Among others...
I mean, if you wanna dog on America - that scene where the army had to find a payphone to call the Pentagon to get the Navy to stop shelling them in Panama was pretty grand.
>>1350079
Keep crying pussyfoot
America lost because it wasn't allowed to invade North Vietnam and take it over.
/thread
>>1347531
>piss away the victory
there was no real victory to be had in eigther situation tho
in iraq we destroyed infestructure and replaced the government with incompetants and in vietman the government we suported was undemocratic
Vietnam has never lost a war, so it's to be expected.
Good thing we're bros again. Poisoned dagger aimed at the heart of China, etc.
>>1350185
Creator is probably a Russian or a British trotskeyite. Note the "Lend lease didn't help the USSR at all! Keeping the Germans from getting North African oil didn't matter! Monty was more successful!" stuff.
>>1351477
this
>>1351829
>and in vietman the government we suported was undemocratic
Because that stopped the US literally everywhere else amiright
>>1347476
And on the flipside you have trolls shitposting about how 10 gorillion bloodthirsty obese Americans were destroyed by 20 peaceful vietnamese monks armed with nothing but bamboo staffs.
>call me Thorburn, John H staff sergeant
>marksman skill in killin illin i'm able and willin
>>1346230
>get its ass kicked in Vietnam?
It didn't? The US left after signing a treaty with the North not to invade the South when they left and when we were gone GUESS WHAT HAPPENS. South Vietnam lost the war, not the US. We also had a population of fifth columnists and an incompetent administration which didn't help things at all -- in fact they are the most responsible in the US's withdrawal.
God dammit I really wish this "America lost to primitive rice farmers xddd" meme would fucking die already...
>>1351969
>Vietnam has never lost a war, so it's to be expected
Yeah. I mean, it's not like they weren't conquered by the worst French army in history and became a colony or anything.
>>1346230
Have you ever fought in a jungle before?
It way different than your european deciduous forest, actual jungles are hard places to have fights because of the foliage in your way and your enemies are naturally camouflaged by all the growth. The only way Muricans could even beat the Viets was to turn the forest into a wasteland so they could see traps more clearly in actual jungle battle the Viets would rape the Muricans.
>>1352179
>in actual jungle battle the Viets would rape the Muricans
>have .17% of the casualties
>"raped"
No.
>>1346230
>Lets bomb this area
okay
>Lets then land where we just bombed
But wouldn't that be announcing our presence?
>Shut it!
>>1352194
1.7*
>>1346230
It was never a war between the U.S and Vietnam, it was a war between western and eastern powers. The war ended for the same reason it began: politics
>>1350079
This is the most butthurt Eurocuck post I have ever seen. How does it feel being irrelevant?
>>1350217
Damn it feels good to be American. How can Europeans even compete?
>>1348580
>he thinks the AR is direct impingement
wew lad
South Vietnam probably could've became something like South Korea if the US stayed. Not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing though. Seeing how bad North Korea is with their people starving.
my dad was in Vietnam. he said it was a madhouse. soldiers at the front were always in need of supplies, while at the back they had multiple of everything just sitting around. the US is ass sometimes.
>>1346230
mines in the middle of the jungle and they placed them everywhere
without that it would have been a us victory
The US in Vietnam suffered the same problem the British did in the Revolutionary War.
Problems at home and the willingness to fight normally rather that exterminating anybody even remotely sympathetic to the enemy cause.
>>1352485
>Attempting to imply that the Vietnamese DIDN'T lose many more soldiers than the Americans and only managed to get them to leave by scaring the civilian population into protesting the war.
