• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Robert McNamara, ex-defense secretary, dies

Re: McNamara dies

No, we didn't drop more bombs on Northern targets than we did on Germany and if you drop enough bombs, resolve will disolve, as proven during WW2.

Umm... how was resolve broken? I mean, look at England. It just made them fight harder.

The quickest way to make them stop wanting to be guerilla is destroy their will to fight, which is what we almost did, even with the half assed tactics we used during the war.

How did we destroy it? We were being fought until we left.
 
Re: McNamara dies

Umm... how was resolve broken? I mean, look at England. It just made them fight harder.

Germany's resolve was broken by all the bombing. The Germans in no way inflicted the same amount of damage on England that the Allies inflicted on Germany.



How did we destroy it? We were being fought until we left.

Well, first off, we rendered the Viet Cong combat ineffective. All the local force VC units were disbanded and main force VC units were absorbed by the NVA. Second, I never claimed we destroyed their will to fight, but we did destroy the North's political will to carry on, as long as US troops were operating in theater, hence The Treaty of Paris. The Communists didn't sign that treaty because they were winning hands down.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

I'll match you source for source. I'm not the sort that shoots the messanger on a subject like this, like some people. You game? Or, are you just buying into the real revisionist history that you've been erroneously taught your whole life?

If I had any hope of getting a real debate out of this I would, and if it was on ANY other topic I might entertain it anyway even without that hope for the sake of a good argument, but I simply cannot wrap my mind around how you can take that stance.

Really, just the thought that someone could sincerely hold that postition, I don't even know where to begin!

Have you seen the footage of the US evacuation?
I can KINDA see what you are getting at with they whole "they signed a peace treaty then violated" thing... but seriously, that was a fumbling attempt for the US to save face in front of an all out retreat/evacuation as a prelude to complete occupation by the north.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

If I had any hope of getting a real debate out of this I would, and if it was on ANY other topic I might entertain it anyway even without that hope for the sake of a good argument, but I simply cannot wrap my mind around how you can take that stance.

Really, just the thought that someone could sincerely hold that postition, I don't even know where to begin!


If you're scared, say your scared. If it's so obvious that you're right, then it should be a cake walk for you.

Have you seen the footage of the US evacuation?

I sure have. Have you? Did you notice that those were civilian employees in the US embassy? Do you realize American combat forces had been re-deployed from Vietnam for two years prior to that footage being shot? Those weren't American combat forces being evaced in 1975. You are aware of that, right?
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

I was going to edit this in but you might be replying now so that wouldn't be fair, I'd like to respond to this:
No, we didn't drop more bombs on Northern targets than we did on Germany and if you drop enough bombs, resolve will disolve, as proven during WW2.
The differances between the two are so astronomical as to defy easy exemplification.

Also, I'm pretty sure that per capita we did.

Lets start with the basics: The Germans like in open feilds and cities in brick, concrete or timber constructed homes with lots of goods and items that are not easlily moved.

The Viet Cong lived in grass huts in jungles and all their worldly possessions could be strapped to their backs and moved in a matter of minutes...

So do you see how this analogy breaks down fundamentally or should I go on?

Bombs don't work on people in thick jungles with grass houses like they do on Europeans.

The cultural and economic differences are usually the hardest things for people with preconceived notions to comprehend.
 
Last edited:
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

If you're scared, say your scared. If it's so obvious that you're right, then it should be a cake walk for you.
Not scared, try bored...
I sure have. Have you? Did you notice that those were civilian employees in the US embassy? Do you realize American combat forces had been re-deployed from Vietnam for two years prior to that footage being shot? Those weren't American combat forces being evaced in 1975. You are aware of that, right?
The point is why are people who have association with the Americans deadly afraid of the rape and slaughter approaching them if America won?

Oh wait, its that America won, but the South Vietamese lost so its all their fault right?

Riiiiiiiiiiiight....
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

If you're scared, say your scared. If it's so obvious that you're right, then it should be a cake walk for you.



I sure have. Have you? Did you notice that those were civilian employees in the US embassy? Do you realize American combat forces had been re-deployed from Vietnam for two years prior to that footage being shot? Those weren't American combat forces being evaced in 1975. You are aware of that, right?

You are more right than the others, but also flawed in your thinking. Saying outright that Vietnam was a victory will insinuate that you believe our ultimate objective was achieved... when it wasn't. But the war was not lost on the battlefield, it was lost at home. It was a political and moral defeat, not a military one... The American GI in Vietnam demonstrated some of the greatest feats of bravery and ingenuity in the history of Western warfare, defeating thousands of entrenched NVA troops in Hue. The marines inflicted thousands of casualities while sustaining some 150. That is one for the history books.

As for the American military leadership...they were incompetent. Many blame politicians like McNamara... but Westy and the rest of MACV were also unshamingly not fit for the job. Westy was by no means a terrible general and to be scapegoated, and some could make the argument he was forced to fight the war like he did, but a good general would've found more effective methods of reaching the military's ultimate objective... not just stacking up body counts and giving the soldiers and the homefront absolutely no physical signs of victory.

As for the American military itself... evolved. It learned the techniques and methods of counter-insurgency, developed the proper tactics to defeat a guerilla enemy, and demonstrated unbelievably awesome firepower. They fought with hands tied behind their back... but by Nixon's Presidency, they were more independent. If their had been a serious concerted effort in 1969-1971 to defeat the North Vietnamese, without sluggish attempts to limit the war, we could've seen total victory.
 
Last edited:
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

I was going to edit this in but you might be replying now so that wouldn't be fair, I'd like to respond to this:
The differances between the two are so astronomical as to defy easy exemplification.

Lets start with the basics: The Germans like in open feilds and cities in brick, concrete or timber constructed homes with lots of goods and items that are not easlily moved.

The Viet Cong lived in grass huts in jungles and all their worldly possessions could be strapped to their backs and moved in a matter of minutes...

So do you see how this analogy breaks down fundamentally or should I go on?

Bombs don't work on people in thick jungles with grass houses like they do on Europeans.

The cultural and economic differences are usually the hardest things for people with preconceived notions to comprehend.

Who said anything about bombing grass huts in the countryside. Go back and see that I pointed to built up areas such as Hanoi and Haiphong. You want to try and break down the analogy and don't even know what I'm talking about. Wanna try again?
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

The main reason we lost the War was that Sect.McNamara wouldn't allow the bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong in 1965 if Rolling Thunder was allowed to attack these two Cities then the out come of the war would have been far different.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

Who said anything about bombing grass huts in the countryside. Go back and see that I pointed to built up areas such as Hanoi and Haiphong. You want to try and break down the analogy and don't even know what I'm talking about. Wanna try again?

The simple fact is the majority of the North's fighting forces were in those grass huts, and if you can't get to them you can't break their back,[or I should get their families], any comparisons between those wars are spurrious at best.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

You are more right than the others, but also flawed in your thinking. Saying outright that Vietnam was a victory will insinuate that you believe our ultimate objective was achieved... when it wasn't. But the war was not lost on the battlefield, it was lost at home. It was a political and moral defeat, not a military one... The American GI in Vietnam demonstrated some of the greatest feats of bravery and ingenuity in the history of Western warfare, defeating thousands of entrenched NVA troops in Hue. The marines inflicted thousands of casualities while sustaining some 150. That is one for the history books.

This is what I'm talking about...
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

The main reason we lost the War was that Sect.McNamara wouldn't allow the bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong in 1965 if Rolling Thunder was allowed to attack these two Cities then the out come of the war would have been far different.

Nixon bomed Hanoi and it didn't seem to win us the war. It was much more than that anyway... we needed to assault enemy sanctuaries across the border in force. Thailand, Laos, Cambodia... even North Vietnam if possible. Bombing would need to be directed at the North Vietnamese capital but also at North Vietnamese harbors... All this with a troop surge, a concerted anti-Viet Cong effort, and a campaign to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese people. It would've taken a lot for total victory, but it was possible.
 
Last edited:
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

You are more right than the others, but also flawed in your thinking. Saying outright that Vietnam was a victory will insinuate that you believe our ultimate objective was achieved... when it wasn't. But the war was not lost on the battlefield, it was lost at home.

That's what I meant by a more decisive victory and not politicizing the war. Wars are fought and won the the battlefield, not the political arena.

As for the American military leadership, they were incompetent. Many blame politicians like McNamara... but Westy and the rest of MACV were also unshamingly not fit for the job. Westy was by no means a terrible general and to be scapegoated, and some could make the argument he was forced to fight the war like he did, but a good general would've found more effective methods of reaching the ultimate objective... not just stacking up body counts and giving the soldiers and the homefront absolutely not physical signs of victory.

American military leadership wasn't incompetent. It was the civilian leadership that micromanaged the war that was incompetent

As for the American military itself... evolved. It learned the techniques and methods of counter-insurgency, developed the proper tactics to defeat a guerilla enemy, and demonstrated unbelievably awesome firepower. They fought with hands tied behind their back... thats the truth.

Agreed. Even with one hand tied behind his back, the American combat soldier kicked the living **** out of the enemy in every engagement.

Vietnam was the ONLY American war where:

No American unit surrendered en masse.

Our kill ratio was over 10 to 1.

No American general officers were killed, or captured.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

The simple fact is the majority of the North's fighting forces were in those grass huts, and if you can't get to them you can't break their back,[or I should get their families], any comparisons between those wars are spurrious at best.

That's a negative. It was the fighters in those grass huts that were rendered combat in-effective in 1968. The VC ceased to exist as a combat force after the Tet Offensive and the the Tet Offensive was a massive failure for the Communists.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

That's a negative. It was the fighters in those grass huts that were rendered combat in-effective in 1968. The VC ceased to exist as a combat force after the Tet Offensive and the the Tet Offensive was a massive failure for the Communists.

If you want to talk about all the failures of the communists we could have a nice fireside chat all day long, I already said they lost like 90+% of the battles...

But who unified Viet Nam?

The winners...
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

If you want to talk about all the failures of the communists we could have a nice fireside chat all day long, I already said they lost like 90+% of the battles...

But who unified Viet Nam?

The winners...

BUT, the United States didn't lose the war. Why is it do hard for you to get a grip on that?
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

BUT, the United States didn't lose the war. Why is it do hard for you to get a grip on that?

Our ultimate objective, a free and democratic South Vietnam was ultimately lost. Military victory is irrelevent if political victory doesn't follow.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

That's what I meant by a more decisive victory and not politicizing the war. Wars are fought and won the the battlefield, not the political arena.

But the government does have a role in ensuring that the military is doing its job humanely and effectively.

Wars are always politicized... war itself is a further means of diplomacy.



American military leadership wasn't incompetent. It was the civilian leadership that micromanaged the war that was incompetent

No. LBJ and some of his key advisors that wanted to limit the war are not solely responsible. The incompetent military command were reponsible for overly agressive tactics, huge and ineffective operations, and aligning themselves with the civilian leadership henceforth forming a war of pure attrition. You can't just kill yourself out of a war... killing the enemy should be one element of your war plan, but not your sole element.
 
Re: McNamara dies

We defeated the enemy on the battlefield. While our political goal was botched, because of the violation of a leagal and binding treaty and no one bothered to enforce that treaty, as promised; we did achieve our objective on the battlefield and that was to force the enemy into submission. It went wrong when we didn't force them into submission, enough. This is what happens when wars are fought on the political front instead of the battle front.

The South Vietnamese lost to The North, because we didn't give them the support we promised. US forces were never defeated by the Communists in Southeast Asia.

So we lost.

Think of it this way, if two teams are playing hockey, and one team dominates the game but accidentally scores three own-goals, while only scoring two goals for their own team, they lose.

Dominating all game don't mean **** if the objective is lost.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

Our ultimate objective, a free and democratic South Vietnam was ultimately lost. Military victory is irrelevent if political victory doesn't follow.

Since the Vietnam war's ultimate objective was to thwart expansionist, agressive Communist policy... we did achieve some victory.

And even though it is unclear whether Reds would have persisted in this aggressive policy if South Vietnam had capitulated without our intervention... it is clear that their policy was ended, or post-poned, when we did intervene.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

Since the Vietnam war's ultimate objective was to thwart expansionist, agressive Communist policy... we did achieve some victory.

Doesn't taking over south Vietnam count as expanding and aggressive? :confused:
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

Doesn't taking over south Vietnam count as expanding and aggressive? :confused:

The Chinese warred Vietnam instead of continuing to assist them. Vietnam overthrew the Communist government in Camobodia. There was a Sino-Soviet split. There was no longer the huge second world support of Communist forces in third world countries(For a while).There were no more dominoes.... I am not saying we achieved ultimate victory, but victory is not always so black and white. We did win a partial victory.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

The Chinese warred Vietnam instead of continuing to assist them. Vietnam overthrew the Communist government in Camobodia. There was a Sino-Soviet split. There was no longer the huge second world support of Communist forces in third world countries(For a while).There were no more dominoes.... I am not saying we achieved ultimate victory, but victory is not always so black and white. We did win a partial victory.

So in essence, the enemy we lost to did more to stop down communism than we did by hitting Cambodia. :lol:

Also, did Laos not become a communist country after we lost Vietnam?

Seems to me the expansion, or stopping of the expansion, was not affected by our involvement.
 
Re: Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara Dies

Nixon bomed Hanoi and it didn't seem to win us the war. It was much more than that anyway... we needed to assault enemy sanctuaries across the border in force. Thailand, Laos, Cambodia... even North Vietnam if possible. Bombing would need to be directed at the North Vietnamese capital but also at North Vietnamese harbors... All this with a troop surge, a concerted anti-Viet Cong effort, and a campaign to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese people. It would've taken a lot for total victory, but it was possible.

Please noted which year I stated 1965 not 1969 big difference if Rolling Thunder had attacked Hanoi and Haiphong in 65 things would have been very different.
 
Back
Top Bottom