- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The True History Of How Vietnam Was Lost
Posted on 8/29/14 at 4:54 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 8/29/14 at 4:54 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The last US ground forces actually left Vietnam in 1973. The final push for victory was actually accomplished by the South Vietnamese Army (which contrary to popular myth was by the early 70's a formidable force) and massive US Air Power. There was also a functioning government in the South as well. But let's not kid ourselves here. The South was totally dependent on the US for survival. but just as the South was totally dependent on the US, the North likewise was a a puppet of the USSR. The only difference is that when the Vietnam war ended in 1973, the Soviets helped nourish and rebuild the north while we abandoned the South. The end result was within 2 years the South was on the verge of collapse (thanks to our neglect)while the North had rearmed and were ready for another war. What ensued at that point was genocide.
I find discussion like this fascinating. (Some times too much so as I'll then spend an inordinate amount of time reading and learning about one subject then move on to another).
When you say abandoned them, did we pull even financial support and sending equipment and stuff? As a parallel, I don't think we send many troops to Israel but they tend to do well with the financial and maybe equipment support that we send them. Did the South Vietnamese govt. not get even this type of support from us after '73?
1
Posted on 8/29/14 at 4:56 pm to Darth_Vader
Excellent post, Darth. We need to continue this... 
Posted on 8/29/14 at 5:02 pm to Spaceman Spiff
I'll observe, like I usually do in these threads, that the only SE Asian countries that fell to communism were the ones in whose wars we became actively involved. Our intervention made matters worse, not better.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 5:52 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
I'll observe, like I usually do in these threads, that the only SE Asian countries that fell to communism were the ones in whose wars we became actively involved. Our intervention made matters worse, not better.
50 million South Koreans who will go to bed tonight without having to worry about their whole family being starved to death in a prison camp due to one of them not bowing low enough in front of a picture of the "Dear Leader" beg to differ.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 5:54 pm to Methuselah
quote:
When you say abandoned them, did we pull even financial support and sending equipment and stuff? As a parallel, I don't think we send many troops to Israel but they tend to do well with the financial and maybe equipment support that we send them. Did the South Vietnamese govt. not get even this type of support from us after '73?
By abandoned then, I mean we pulled all assistance, military and financial, from them. In addition to this, for all intents and purposes we made it clear to the North that we had totally washed our hands of South Vietnam and had given them a free hand to do with the South as they saw fit.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 6:16 pm to Darth_Vader
Korea is not SE Asia.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 6:30 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
Korea is not SE Asia.
Of all the hairs to split.
You're point was that US intervention against Communist attempts to take over countries always made things worse. I'm sorry but you're point is patently wrong and Korea is the prime example. But don't forget about places like the Philippines and Taiwan that are not Communist thanks to the US. What made things worse in Vietnam (and the rest of Indochina) was not that we were there, it's that we abandoned them after the fact.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 6:34 pm to Darth_Vader
You can't manufacture a will to fight, as we never seem to learn (see Iraq.) By contrast, Thailand was next door to the shitshow and was never under serious threat, putting to rest the Domino Theory.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 6:36 pm to Darth_Vader
(no message)
Posted on 8/29/14 at 6:40 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
You can't manufacture a will to fight, as we never seem to learn (see Iraq.) By contrast, Thailand was next door to the shitshow and was never under serious threat, putting to rest the Domino Theory.
You're forgetting Laos & Cambodia which literally are between Vietnam and Thailand.... Both of which fell to Communism in 1975 along with South Vietnam... very much like dominoes.
This post was edited on 8/29/14 at 6:42 pm
Posted on 8/29/14 at 6:43 pm to Darth_Vader
I link them all together, since they were all Indochina.
ETA: And Thailand was an actual country, not an artificial construction by treaty. That's the difference. The dominoes stopped falling when people felt they had something worth defending.
ETA: And Thailand was an actual country, not an artificial construction by treaty. That's the difference. The dominoes stopped falling when people felt they had something worth defending.
This post was edited on 8/29/14 at 6:47 pm
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:01 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Darth_Vader
Are you a history professor?
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:03 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
I link them all together, since they were all Indochina.
ETA: And Thailand was an actual country, not an artificial construction by treaty. That's the difference. The dominoes stopped falling when people felt they had something worth defending.
You do realize that following WWII just as the US established democratic republics the Soviets likewise sat up puppet Communist ones as well. The South Vietnamese solders fought until the bitter end. The notion that the NVA and VC were all dedicated to the cause while the ARVN solders could care less is one of the biggest liberal lies of the Vietnam war. The only difference is the Soviets stood by their puppet and we didn't.
ETA: To give you an idea of their dedication, it's estimated the ARVN suffered almost 1.4 million casualties during the Vietnam War. That's THREE TIMES the casualties suffered by the US in the same war and about the same as those suffered by the North. So if the soldiers of the South bled at the same rate as those in the north, how can you claim the North troops saw the war as "worth" fighting while trying to make it out that the South troop were just waiting to surrender at the first chance?
This post was edited on 8/29/14 at 7:10 pm
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:05 pm to DrTyger
quote:
Are you a history professor?
No, but I get asked that question all the time and have been told more than once that I missed my calling.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:06 pm to Darth_Vader
You should read this book
LINK
LINK
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:07 pm to Darth_Vader
I double majored in college. I get told the same thing.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:12 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
You should read this book
LINK
I have and no offense but it's bunk. Here's some suggested reading for you....
LINK
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:15 pm to Darth_Vader
I honor the man for his service, but he is not a historian.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 7:23 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
I honor the man for his service, but he is not a historian
His book is the most accurate account of the war ever written. The problem is that he goes against the liberal myth that grew out of the "New Left" in the 60's & early 70's.
But speaking of Historians, the guy in video in the OP is a gentleman by the name of Bruce Herschensohn. He's a senior fellow at the Pepperdine School of Public Policy. You don't get that title out of a Cracker Jack Box. In a little over 5 minutes he summarizes what Mark Woodruff laid out in his book quite well.
Posted on 8/29/14 at 8:29 pm to Darth_Vader
Thanks for the link to the book, Darth. It's now on my list. The Vietnam War, like WWII, is one of my passions so to speak. Have spent many years reading and studying and learning about it. Having a family member who has been in every war the U. S. has been in going back to the Revolutionary (including my wife who has had three tours in the sandbox), I guess one could say military history is in my blood.
I grew up listening to stories of WWII from my Grandfather, so that kickstarted that. I also have a deep interest in Vietnam and hearing what my uncle went through at Dak To (he rarely, if ever, talks but will answer questions about his unit, etc) spurned interest in that war
I really enjoy threads like these and that's one reason why I pushed for a history board, but I guess games and other crap is just more important. Here's to all of you that participated in a great discussion.
I grew up listening to stories of WWII from my Grandfather, so that kickstarted that. I also have a deep interest in Vietnam and hearing what my uncle went through at Dak To (he rarely, if ever, talks but will answer questions about his unit, etc) spurned interest in that war
I really enjoy threads like these and that's one reason why I pushed for a history board, but I guess games and other crap is just more important. Here's to all of you that participated in a great discussion.
This post was edited on 8/29/14 at 8:31 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News