Blitzing: In Game vs. Historical Terms

[ArtistofWarfare]

North Vietnam was pushing for unification through war, with America standing in the way. Not only did they manage to create one Vietnam under Communist rule, they also managed to make the US withdraw, a victory in itself. You don't really think, had the Tet Offensive never occur, or had the US manage to push and take Hanoi, that the public opinion would stay anti-war do you? Through an offensive defense, the N. Vietnamese managed to break America's will to fight. They won.

Exactly.

Winning a war is not defined in one linear way - occupying the enemy capital.

Victory conditions vary by conflict...as well as by battle. See: Pyrrhic Victory.

Correct on Vietnam- Militarily, the United States was not nor could be defeated. If you took politics and public opinion out of the equation, the NVA would have been destroyed within 90-120 days. It was on it's last legs. Further, outside of the Tet Offensive, you really cannot find a single engagement (large or small scale) where American forces were defeated. They won over 98 percent of the engagements.

The communist forces won that fight by achieving everything the United States intervened to prevent in the first place. Let's also remember that the United States was not the first military power to invade them either: The French met a similar fate prior.

If you come in my home with the intention of stealing my jewelry and money - and I wake up and get into a physical confrontation with you, resulting in myself being seriously wounded and yourself being totally unharmed - yet you run out of the house and I keep my jewelry: I won that fight. I achieved my objective (protect what is mine) and you did not achieve yours (get my jewelry and money). It doesn't matter who won the physical encounter. That was not the objective.

Objectives and goals determine the winner and loser. The attacker establishes the initial objectives and the defender's objectives will typically be orchestrated around this. Denying the attacker their goals is the definition of winning. The North Vietnamese won. To begin an in depth explanation about public opinion in the United States being the reason for withdrawal and not military losses, would simply be explaining WHY we lost. We still lost.

By the way: Good post Swedish.

p.s.- To draw a direct comparison between Kadagar's statement "well they weren't occupying Washington": The Russians don't currently occupy Tblisi nor have they. You're telling me that means the Georgians won that conflict last month? No...just...no. The Russians wanted to technically annex South Ossetia and Abkhazia. For all intents and purposes, this was accomplished. Russia achieved a military victory in a small scale conflict.