• 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!

Who won the Vietnam War?

Who won the Vietnam War?

  • The French

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The British

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Americans

    Votes: 6 6.1%
  • The Canadians

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Chinese

    Votes: 3 3.0%
  • The Russians

    Votes: 3 3.0%
  • The Japanese

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Vietnamese

    Votes: 46 46.5%
  • No one

    Votes: 23 23.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 18 18.2%

  • Total voters
    99
Are you saying that the Peninsular Campaign was an example of an offensive strategy?

Edit: would you agree that the Confederates during the Civil War were pretty much in the same strategic position that we were in during the Revolutionary War?

Not even hardly.[/QUOTE]

The Peninsular Wars were an example of good defensive strategy on the part of the Spanish, and an example of Clausewitz' maxim that defense is the stronger from or war (which is different from saying the defensive side will always win.)

As for the Patriots vs. the Confederates, it is my belief that their situations weren't the same, but were similar enough.
 
Last edited:
And i want to just add that things in vietnam have improved immensely economically and politically. what i admire about vietnam as opposed to china is that they have granted limited democracy but stuck to there socialist system unlike china which did the exact opposite.
 
I'm a history major and yes I realize this. However I believe the fear was entirely overblown.



The Cold War is hardly something I would call a "direct" conflict. For the most part, it was about two superpowers that would have been going at it regardless of ideology. Apart from the air raid drills and all that, in realistic terms the Cold War had little effect on the lives of ordinary Americans except when we chose to make it a problem, and in the lone case of the Cuban Missile Crisis.



Really? Where? The West has won. History has proved Communism to be a failure at the state level and ineffective at the economic level. Communism defeated itself because it wasn't feasible.



If you could list some concrete examples I would like to hear how Communism permeated American culture. We certainly don't go running around singing L'Internationale or calling each other "comrade."



Because it is becoming more and more irrelevant. Stalinism is dead.

I didn't say the Cold war was direct, but the Vietnam war was one of the results from it. And i disagree on how you think the Cold war did not impact American citizens. My Dad and many other's willingly signed up for the Vietnam war because of it's influence.

The remnants of the disregard of communism still exist in our culture everywhere, this is shown even in the opposition to socialism, to many, China is considered and revised communist country.

"If you could list some concrete examples I would like to hear how Communism permeated American culture. We certainly go run around singing L'Internationale or calling each other "comrade.""

I meant the fear of communism permeated our culture. How would saying the other make sense?
Plus i personally think a lot of the old communist thinking is being represented by socialist today.
 
actually most people in both north and south vietnam supported the communists.

According to Ike himself, if Vietnam had been allowed to be reunified and proper elections held, Ho Chi Minh would have won 80% of the vote, so the fact that the Communists at least garnered a vast amount of public support during the 50s is true.
 
I didn't say the Cold war was direct, but the Vietnam war was one of the results from it. And i disagree on how you think the Cold war did not impact American citizens. My Dad and many other's willingly signed up for the Vietnam war because of it's influence.

If I were living during that time, I would fail to see how Communism directly affected me (my life, my safety, my family, my personal livelihood etc.) and if it constituted a direct threat to our national security, before I signed up to fight. It's really hard to see how the activities of people in one tiny slice of real estate in Southeast Asia really puts the livelihoods of ordinary Americans on the line.

I meant the fear of communism permeated our culture. How would saying the other make sense?

Sorry if I misunderstood, the wording in your previous confusing made it a bit confusing. Again, I personally believe the fear to be entirely overblown.

Plus i personally think a lot of the old communist thinking is being represented by socialist today.

Perhaps. That hardly makes socialists evil people, or gives Americans a legitimate reason to fear Communism today.
 
If you could list some concrete examples I would like to hear how Communism permeated American culture. We certainly go run around singing L'Internationale or calling each other "comrade.

that would be dope, comrade.
 
actually most people in both north and south vietnam supported the communists.

Hardly. They had their fair share of support, no doubt, but did they really have a choice? Communism talks a good game, plus the Communist Party was an organizing principle that the south lacked sufficiently in opposition, but when it was over in '75, communists reverted to their true colors and purged ideological dissent. That is the only way a "communist" movement can survive post conflict: it becomes a autocracy. The people of Vietnam suffered decades of maltreatment.
 
Hardly. They had their fair share of support, no doubt, but did they really have a choice? Communism talks a good game, plus the Communist Party was an organizing principle that the south lacked sufficiently in opposition, but when it was over in '75, communists reverted to their true colors and purged ideological dissent. That is the only way a "communist" movement can survive post conflict: it becomes a autocracy. The people of Vietnam suffered decades of maltreatment.

I agree, but I think it would've been better for them to realize their own mistake rather than for us to do something about it. Had we won in Vietnam, the alternative would most likely have been a Vietnam united under a corrupt, and just-as-autocratic RVN regime (either that or it would have become a perpetually unstable government). That's why I believe that the Vietnamese people would have been screwed either way, but that it was better for them to make a mistake and learn from it instead of what actually happened.
 
Last edited:
Why do you think that it was Democrats who created aids?


I dont, that was meant as a snide comment about the free sex thing during the nam war ...nam was a big excuse for alot of privledged prima donna'
 
I agree, but I think it would've been better for them to realize their own mistake rather than for us to do something about it. Had we won in Vietnam, the alternative would most likely have been a Vietnam united under a corrupt, and just-as-autocratic RVN regime. That's why I believe that the Vietnamese people would have been screwed either way, but that it was better for them to make a mistake and learn from it instead of what actually happened.

you could be right, but personal freedom is the main issue. Communism is bad because it suppresses the individual. The American value's and the Cold War alliances is why America think's any government that supports Liberty is 100X better then any communist government, and it's a crime against man to restrict Liberty. So regardless if it comes out worse or better, they have their personal freedom and liberty.
 
I agree, but I think it would've been better for them to realize their own mistake rather than for us to do something about it. Had we won in Vietnam, the alternative would most likely have been a Vietnam united under a corrupt, and just-as-autocratic RVN regime (either that or it would have become a perpetually unstable government). That's why I believe that the Vietnamese people would have been screwed either way, but that it was better for them to make a mistake and learn from it instead of what actually happened.

I agree. Back then, Cold War mode, we wanted stability and to deny the communists space. The result of that was a tendency to support dictators that would keep communism out and be our buddy-buddy. To detrimental effect for our reputation. Iraq does represent a change to this policy, as we went to explicitly help the Iraqis form their own democracy, rather than put a strongman in charge. I look forward to us getting out entirely and let them sort out the last details.
 
No one won it.

The US acheived it's goal of making the South militarily self-sufficient, with the premise that the US would continue to supply war materiel as needed. Two years after the US combat troops left Vietnam, the South was defeated, mainly because the Democrat Congress in it's euphoria at having unseated Nixon naturally stabbed America's ally in the back.

How can you say that when the South Vietnamese never had a chance of winning with war without direct U.S. involvement?

The NORTH Vietnamese achieved their goal of enslaving those in the South as didn't manage to escape.

True

The French haven't won a war since Austerlitz.

Sino-French War... 1885

The Russians got what they wanted.

True... they wanted Viet Nam as a check on China...
 
I agree. Back then, Cold War mode, we wanted stability and to deny the communists space. The result of that was a tendency to support dictators that would keep communism out and be our buddy-buddy. To detrimental effect for our reputation. Iraq does represent a change to this policy, as we went to explicitly help the Iraqis form their own democracy, rather than put a strongman in charge. I look forward to us getting out entirely and let them sort out the last details.

We supported Saddam until he kicked out Western oil. Then we brought about regime change to support another currupt government in Iraq, one that would let Western oil back in. What is it that changed again?
 
If I were living during that time, I would fail to see how Communism directly affected me (my life, my safety, my family, my personal livelihood etc.) and if it constituted a direct threat to our national security, before I signed up to fight. It's really hard to see how the activities of people in one tiny slice of real estate in Southeast Asia really puts the livelihoods of ordinary Americans on the line.
Hmmmm, you seem to to be an isolationist, Those active in the world news and politics at the time felt really strongly on these issues. The American government and it's people use the American values in order to answer the very hard question's the world politics proposed during that time and even today. All these decisions do have consequences you are not aware of, if America just didn't give a **** what happened around them through history i don't think we would be as near as large of a world power. If communist countries just arose without any of our resistance
BUT this is kinda pointless trying to describe the importance of American values in history and today to a Liberal (I don't really mean that in offense).




Sorry if I misunderstood, the wording in your previous confusing made it a bit confusing. Again, I personally believe the fear to be entirely overblown.
Yeaaa, i just don't agree, i just know from personal experience from peoples attitudes toward communism when it is mentioned, and just basic american history with McCarthy'ism(sp?) and stuff. In recent politics it's usually popular to call people a communist, if it was nothing to fear , why would someone care?


Perhaps. That hardly makes socialists evil people, or gives Americans a legitimate reason to fear Communism today.

True, i am using the word fear more loosely then you seem to believe i am suggesting when it relates to today. If a communist person went on next elections ballet, i think people would fear it; hell i would, i would have no idea this world was coming to.

This part is more speculation- but i think a lot of communist of today are pushing for Socialism due to the much unpopularity it has if you would ever try it out in politics.
- And in my opinion, not that socialist people are evil, but i think socialism is bad/evil/violates man's rights.
 
We supported Saddam until he kicked out Western oil. Then we brought about regime change to support another currupt government in Iraq, one that would let Western oil back in. What is it that changed again?

The Iraqi government was not installed by us, it was democratically elected. They are not exactly friendly to our oil companies, since we failed to get any contracts last round. So what was that you were saying that it was all about us getting our oil companies back into Iraq?
 
Right, we allowed Vietnam to fall to communism which created a domino effect and everyone is a communist today. Oh, wait, none of that proganda turned out to be true did it? They have been a tradeing partner of ours since the early 90's.

If we had ended the war years before we did, the only change in outcome would have been tens of thousands less people would have been killed and our National debt would not have increased as much.

Not entirely true. Had the Communists consolidated control of Vietnam in the 1950s or early 1960s, then the Domino Theory may very well have come to pass. Thailand was struggling with Communists through most of the 1950s and into the 1960s. Malaysia had the 'Emergency' in the late 1950s and Indonesia had an attempted Communist coup (from the PKI) in the mid-1960s. Most of this (except an ongoing Communist insurgency in the Philippines) had pretty much died down by 1975. So, saying that Communist victory in the old French Indo-China not resulting in the further spread of communism disproved the Domino Theory shows an ignorance of the change in the situation in the rest of the region between 1954 and 1975.
 
The Iraqi government was not installed by us, it was democratically elected. They are not exactly friendly to our oil companies, since we failed to get any contracts last round. So what was that you were saying that it was all about us getting our oil companies back into Iraq?

The Interim goverment was installed by us and we killed many of the opposition party, and kept the most powerful military on the planet there to influence the elections and keep our troops there to prop up the "new" corrupt government that still can't stand against its own people. Western oil has money invested in Iraqi oil for the first time in over 3 decades thanks to our war.
 
The Interim goverment was installed by us
Whose only purpose was to draft a constitution that was then ratified by popular vote. I fail to see how that influenced Iraq to give us oil contracts that we in fact failed to get long term.

and we killed many of the opposition party
No we did not.

and kept the most powerful military on the planet there to influence the elections
We did not influence the elections.

and keep our troops there to prop up the "new" corrupt government that still can't stand against its own people.
The fastest conversion to democracy ever. We certainly are not propping up the government.

Western oil has money invested in Iraqi oil for the first time in over 3 decades thanks to our war.
We only received short-term contracts and did not land a single contract in the last round, which were long-term contracts.

You bring only the same old tired cynical leftist retard anti-war bull**** to the table, Catawba. What gives you away? The fact that you fail to be nuanced about your evaluation and list positives and negatives, of which there are both. To your way of looking at the war, ideologically trapped, all of it is negative. It completely discredits your opinion. Spout whatever crap you want, assume I respond to you again telling you you are wrong.
 
Best post of the thread...

still, the naysayers haven't actually said what is wrong with the early posts...

I think I've made my own case about why you can't blame the media and liberals for being against a war that wasn't such a good idea in the first place, and only got more unpopular as time dragged on.
 
Hmmmm, you seem to to be an isolationist, Those active in the world news and politics at the time felt really strongly on these issues. The American government and it's people use the American values in order to answer the very hard question's the world politics proposed during that time and even today. All these decisions do have consequences you are not aware of, if America just didn't give a **** what happened around them through history i don't think we would be as near as large of a world power. If communist countries just arose without any of our resistance
BUT this is kinda pointless trying to describe the importance of American values in history and today to a Liberal (I don't really mean that in offense).

I'm not an isolationist. I only feel that the public, and our leaders, should have a rational, intelligent discussion on the use and deployment of military force before it happens. And I personally believe America doesn't always live up to the values it claims to profess, and our foreign policy has historically been filled with internal contradictions and hypocritical positions (for instance, is our intervention in Libya right now really about humanitarian causes? If it were, there are tons of other places that need our help just as much, not to mention places like Yemen and Bahrain which are facing a similar situation to Libya). We claim to be for freedom only when it suits our interests. We claim to be for self-determination, except when some Latin American country decides to go socialist, in which case it is suddenly our business to formulate and coup and install a complete dick(tator) like Pinochet.

Yeaaa, i just don't agree, i just know from personal experience from peoples attitudes toward communism when it is mentioned, and just basic american history with McCarthy'ism(sp?) and stuff. In recent politics it's usually popular to call people a communist, if it was nothing to fear , why would someone care?

The answer to this is simple: propaganda and media perception. I am hardly a Communist supporter, but I believe the whole fear of Communism to be entirely overblown especially during the McCarthy era. The irrational fear of Communism during that time can be compared to the overemphasis on Islam as a religion today, rather than the underlying causes of terrorism.

And in my opinion, not that socialist people are evil, but i think socialism is bad/evil/violates man's rights.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I believe that it really depends on what form that socialist government takes. Certainly with all the freedom and rights that are part of a capitalist society, many injustices still exist.
 
Last edited:
Depends on your point of view.

From a military point of view, the United States won the war. The North Vietnamese Communists certainly achieved their objective of conquering the south and creating a unified Vietnam, ruled by the Communist party, but not because of anything they did, or anything they accomplished. You could almost say they got it on accident, because they military speaking, they got their asses handed to them everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

Please explain? Seems to me we lost the war in every way, shape and form..... the results don't lie.
 
Late to the party, but I'd be hard-pressed to identify anyone that "won" the Vietnam War. Nobody achieved their objectives and nobody benefited from it except arms dealers.

The Vietnamese reunited their country under their own leadership. The Soviets got their client state. We halted the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia. So you could say that everyone walked away with something, but I'd argue that's a damned cold comfort compared to everything we left on the field.
 
Back
Top Bottom