Vietnam... the soldier and other mumblings

[-Silent-Pariya]

I'm sure we all know about vietnam... most americans don't like to talk about it too much becouse obviusly we lost that war, and europeans don't seem to care to much. But i find it quite interesting how the over working of the soldiers had affects on many of them after the war.. drug problems ect. Thanks to the mobility of the helicopter the average foot soldier saw 240 days of combat every year. Pre gunpowder armies would take months to assemble meet-up engage. A more recent comparison in WW2 the average foot soldier in the south pacific saw 10 days of combat each year. Imagine 240 days of combat a year... that has not been seen before. This goes to show that as technology grows it does not necisarly see as much to the protection of the soldier but to the advance in weoponry and the mobility to over-use the soldiers. This is just 1 among many wars *the main 1 for the united states* that shows us as needing and heading towards big troubles. Technology is a dangerous thing and its a shame to see people like Bush flaunting war like its a toy.

[Julian the apostate]

definately true especially with the loss of a true frontline in more modern wars and of course the ever present air support.

[PanzerJaeger]

Small technicality there.. America didnt lose that war.

[Sarmatian]

Small technicality there.. America didnt lose that war.

Care to elaborate that thought?

[-Silent-Pariya]

OFC we didn't lose the war, we just didnt achieve our mission Way to go panzer thats the kinda attitude im looking for WW3 here we come!

[Prince of the Poodles]

Care to elaborate that thought?

The United States accomplished its task of preventing North Vietnam from taking over the south for about 10 years. A peace treaty was signed and a cease fire called. South Vietnam existed for 2 years, before falling to a North Vietnamese attack.

So essentially the United States did what it went to Vietnam to do for 10 years - without losing a single battle, decided it was not worth it anymore, ended the war through treaty and left. 2 years later, the country it had been propping up couldnt sustain itself.

So you tell me: how did the US lose?

[PanzerJaeger]

Couldnt have said it better myself...

[-Silent-Pariya]

Yes the united states got a piece of paper signed which magicly stopped the north from taking over the south... man we're good

And we all know what a legitimate and peaceful south vietnamese government we were supporting

We owned that war... not only that but it helped to completely unify the united states. We own hardcore

[Sarmatian]

The United States accomplished its task of preventing North Vietnam from taking over the south for about 10 years. A peace treaty was signed and a cease fire called. South Vietnam existed for 2 years, before falling to a North Vietnamese attack.

So essentially the United States did what it went to Vietnam to do for 10 years - without losing a single battle, decided it was not worth it anymore, ended the war through treaty and left. 2 years later, the country it had been propping up couldnt sustain itself.

So you tell me: how did the US lose?

Ok, let's keep it simple. North Vietnam wanted to unite with south vietnam and form a communist country. US went there to stop it. Some time later, US have withdrawn and North and South Vietnam were united.

[Pannonian]

Care to elaborate that thought?

It's the Vietnam version of the Dolchstosslegende, which I suppose Panzer would be familiar with. Germany didn't lose WW1 in the field, they were stabbed in the back by the civilian population who stopped supporting them. America didn't lose the Vietnam War in the field, they were stabbed in the back by the civilian population who stopped supporting them.

[Randarkmaan]

It's the Vietnam version of the Dolchstosslegende, which I suppose Panzer would be familiar with. Germany didn't lose WW1 in the field, they were stabbed in the back by the civilian population who stopped supporting them. America didn't lose the Vietnam War in the field, they were stabbed in the back by the civilian population who stopped supporting them.

Good comparison... but remember they didn't blame the civilian population at large it was "the jews and the communists"... in the US it was just "the communists" and perhaps "the liberals", "the hippies" and "those people" and maybe "the jews" as well...

[Marquis of Roland]

c'mon guys, lets put the pride (or excuses) aside and come clean: we lost the war. The whole thing was part of the greater cold war to stop communist expansion, and we couldn't stop vietnam from turning communist, so we pretty much lost that one. That doesn't mean we can't dish out major whoop-ass, we just uh....did it the wrong way that time around

Amazing number, that 240 days a year of combat. I didn't realize it was so high.

Oh and it is of course possible to lose every battle and still win the war. I guess you can say there's one battle that we lost for sure, and its the battle on the home front, which, for a democratic country such as ours, happens to be very important (please don't say they didn't beat us, we lost the war ourselves, I think thats even worse lol).

[The Wizard]

I've read that most of these days were spent doing and seeing absolutely nothing (hence why in WW2 such actions or activities weren't recorded as "combat"). Gets on your nerves after a while, know what I mean?

Also, a lot of these young, drafted soldiers were university students... led by NCOs that often lacked any education beyong primary. They looked down upon them instead of up to (or even on an even level), meaning morale took another blow -- this time on the all-important tactical level.

So essentially the United States did what it went to Vietnam to do for 10 years - without losing a single battle, decided it was not worth it anymore, ended the war through treaty and left. 2 years later, the country it had been propping up couldnt sustain itself.

So you tell me: how did the US lose?

Their goal was to stop a percieved Domino Effect that they envisioned would happen in all of Indochina if Ho Chi Minh and his gang of merry fellows took over all of Vietnam.

In the event, after the U.S. withdrew in '73, this did happen: 1975 was the year that North Vietnam annexed the South, the Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia, and the Pathet Lao putsched Laos -- the three states that grew on Indochina's carcass, all taken over by communists.

Funny fact: red Vietnam helped overthrow the Red Khmer only a couple of years (and millions of Cambodians) later.