Started By
Message

Question for those who served in Vietnam

Posted on 5/20/25 at 7:45 am
Posted by TN Tygah
Member since Nov 2023
6651 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 7:45 am
People often call Vietnam a useless war, I wasn’t alive for it but calling it useless never sat well with me—my uncle served in Vietnam as a navy pilot and it always felt like people were shitting on his service when they referred to the war that way. Maybe I’m overthinking, but that’s my thought process.

I can’t imagine how it feels to risk your life, lose friends, and come home only to hear it was all for nothing. I never talked to him much about it and he’s since passed away, but I wondered how Vietnam veterans feel hearing that.

Any Vietnam vets here—how does it feel when people talk about the war that way? Is it a sensitive subject?
Posted by dickkellog
little rock
Member since Dec 2024
653 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 7:55 am to
where have you been the last 20 years, tell me exactly what policy preferences were advanced in iraq, afghanistan, libya and syria any one losing life or limbs in those conflicts did so in vain. this notion that there's nobility in fighting endless wars in losing efforts is absurd and frankly unamerican.
Posted by BigJim
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2010
14782 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 7:58 am to
The youngest vets will be around 70, so probably not a lot of them posting on this site.

My father-in-law was a Vietnam vet. Helicopter pilot.

While there are those that did denigrate the vets, that isn't necessarily what was meant when people called Vietnam a "useless war."

It more refers to the belief, held by my father-in-law, that there was not really a compelling US interest in Vietnam. It was less about stopping communism, and more about protecting allied property (i.e. plantations).

I have my own views, but my only point here is that calling it a useless war is an attack on the decision makers, not the soldiers (many of whom were drafted) on the ground.
Posted by TROLA
BATON ROUGE
Member since Apr 2004
13937 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:00 am to
I always hate singular terms like useless and pointless when describing military conflicts.. they demean the participants who in general had nothing to do with the conflict. I prefer descriptions more akin to divisive or costly.
Posted by The Maj
Member since Sep 2016
29633 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:02 am to
quote:

call Vietnam a useless war


Calling it what it was is not shitting on those that served in that war... It still does not change the fact that it was a useless, poorly managed war and the first real flex of the MIC muscle to drag things out...

I can respect their service AND hate what our government did at the same time...
Posted by Mid Iowa Tiger
Undisclosed Secure Location
Member since Feb 2008
21951 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:03 am to
Whether a war is useless or not is completely disjoined from those who serve in them.

The men who raise their right hand don’t get to pick and choose where they are sent.
Posted by RolltidePA
North Carolina
Member since Dec 2010
4357 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:06 am to
quote:

Any Vietnam vets here—how does it feel when people talk about the war that way? Is it a sensitive subject?



My dad was drafted and shipped off to Viet Nam. A useless war was exactly as he described it. His friends that I met over the years that were there described it almost the exact same way. How did fighting in some backwater country and getting tens of thousands of US citizens killed advance US interests?

Funny thing is that I've had conversations with them and the parallels between their experience in Viet Nam and mine in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pretty much came to the same conclusion about both. It did wonders for the MIC, at the expense of a lot of young men.
This post was edited on 5/20/25 at 8:49 am
Posted by sta4ever
Member since Aug 2014
16981 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:10 am to
That was a very shitty thing people did back then. Heckling the people who just went and fought over there, and likely saw many people die in gruesome ways. Those guys had no choice in the matter. The protestors should have directed their anger more at the government. And I think as an American society, we have evolved in that way. A lot of us think the Middle Eastern wars from the last 20 years, were pretty pointless, and did nothing but get young Americans killed. Most people today seem to direct any anger at that towards our government and politicans. You don’t hear stories of Iraqi vets being cursed and yelled at.

Now Vietnam always seemed pointless to me when reading about it, but someone made a good point yesterday in one of the Vietnam threads. It wasn’t a pointless war, as in the long run, our efforts in that really put a stop to the spread of communism. We didn’t “win” the war, but it wasn’t really about winning. It was about stopping the spread of communism. Many US wars aren’t necessarily about winning, rather they’re about being a deterrence, and stopping something from continuing.
Posted by Florida_Man1981
Member since Jan 2024
404 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:11 am to
Individuals served honorably but it was a useless war just like Iraq.
This post was edited on 5/20/25 at 8:12 am
Posted by bonescanner
Member since Oct 2011
2540 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:33 am to
I've read a lot over the years about the war. It didnt really hit me how big the sacrifice was until I stood in front of the memorial in Washington. When you look at the section you are standing by and see how small the names are and then look down the hill and see how long the monument is it really hits home. Hard to fathom that many deaths on a generation of Americans.
Posted by BuckeyeGoon
Member since Jan 2025
321 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:34 am to
I wont say that trying to full on occupy afghanistan and iraq was a good idea but the war on terror in general has been successful at preventing any more large scale terrorist attacks after 9/11. There were some nasty terrorist organizations that were allowed to grow and fester in the 80s up through the early 2000s so wiping those out probably prevented thousands more people dying in other terrorist attacks. The US military and intelligence community has eyes and ears all over the middle east now so it's probably 100 times harder to try to plan out another attack than it was in 2001.
Posted by VOR
Member since Apr 2009
65772 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:36 am to
It may have been an unnecessary war,
but that doesn’t detract from the honor, bravery and gallantry of those soldiers who served…
They will always deserve our respect.
Posted by salty1
Member since Jun 2015
4821 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:42 am to
quote:

My dad was drafted and shipped off the Viet Nam. A useless war was exactly as he described it. His friends that I met over the years that were there described it almost the exact same way. How did fighting in some backwater country and getting tens of thousands of US citizens killed advance US interests?

Funny thing is that I've had conversations with them and the parallels between their experience in Viet Nam and mine in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pretty much came to the same conclusion about both. It did wonders for the MIC, at the expense of a lot of young men.


This. My father was a Marine in Vietnam. (Dying) Delta 1/5. 0311. Two of his brothers were also Marines in Vietnam and two other brothers were Army infantry in Vietnam. I was medically retired from the Corps, served everywhere from 92-03…also an 03. Many of my cousins served in the Army during the years I was in the Corps (two retired as CSM). I say all of that to say this…every one of us are anti-war. All of us believe Vietnam was a waste of time and treasure. We all believe that every freaking war we’ve been involved in was ultimately a waste of freaking time and treasure. It is what it is.
Posted by VOR
Member since Apr 2009
65772 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:45 am to
You’re probably right about Iraq, but there were legitimate objectives iin striking Afghanistan (it provided a training ground and other support for terrorists,
primarily schooled in western Pakistan,
but also from around the world) The Taliban was a problem and threat to the civilized world.
Posted by mtb010
San Antonio
Member since Sep 2009
5652 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 8:47 am to
To me, there is a huge difference in saying that the war was for nothing versus being a lunatic and calling those that served baby killers.

I had an uncle that was shot in Vietnam and thank God he made it home. You always, ALWAYS take care of the soldier no matter what. There can be civil discussions as to was it worth the lives of so many Americans, and the answer can be no, but you still have to now how to have that conversation with those that served.
Posted by Gus007
TN
Member since Jul 2018
13299 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 9:09 am to
quote:

where have you been the last 20 years,


I wish I could upvote you a thousand times.

Trump has repeatedly stated the USA is protected by thousands of miles of Ocean on all sides. Yet we cross those miles to get involved in wasteful wars.
We station weaponry close to potential war zones, yet we are told that Japan and Germany were threats to us. How could they wage war from across the Pacific and Atlantic with WW II equipment.
If Roosevelt wasn't a traitor, we could have been prepared when the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor and ended their War efforts then.

When Japan attacked, we immediately entered the war in Europe. ???
What were we doing? Protecting the Soviet Union?
Posted by MasonTiger
Mason, Ohio
Member since Jan 2005
17664 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 9:12 am to
quote:

BigJim

Spot on.
Posted by alphaandomega
Tuscaloosa-Here to Serve
Member since Aug 2012
15824 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 9:39 am to
I believe vietnam was the first war where the MIC worked hard to keep it going and unwinnable. The MIC lobbied congress\military to not allow the soldiers to do what needed to be done to defeat the enemy. They wanted forever war (and forever invoicing of replacement weapons).

The treaties regarding "rules of war" after WW2 created this. Our military should be the monster we keep locked in a box. But when diplomacy fails and that box is opened the only instructions should be "go kill XXXXX" and not have any rules for accomplishing that directive.

If countries knew this would be the response they would work to come to an agreement diplomatically.
Posted by Yellow Truck
Member since May 2025
282 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 9:53 am to
The men who fought that war never lost a major battle.

Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara should have both been stood against a wall and shot.

Posted by 4cubbies
Member since Sep 2008
54546 posts
Posted on 5/20/25 at 9:55 am to
quote:

where have you been the last 20 years, tell me exactly what policy preferences were advanced in iraq, afghanistan, libya and syria any one losing life or limbs in those conflicts did so in vain. this notion that there's nobility in fighting endless wars in losing efforts is absurd and frankly unamerica


The last war that was fought to protect Americans was WW2.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram