• 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
The VC were victorious. They defeated the imperialist American yellow-dogs. America choses to fight weak nations where they can slaughter women, children, and elderly men. Americans are indeed yellow-dogs. Long live the VC ! Long live the PLO ! YANKEE GO HOME !

Cause the U.S. has a history of going into weak countries just to slaughter people. I think you got America confused with the VC and the NVA.
 
Cause the U.S. has a history of going into weak countries just to slaughter people. I think you got America confused with the VC and the NVA.

Nah, he's just another American hating Left Winger.
 
Cause the U.S. has a history of going into weak countries just to slaughter people. I think you got America confused with the VC and the NVA.

which weak countries did the VC and NVA invade and slaughter the citizens
 
which weak countries did the VC and NVA invade and slaughter the citizens

More inferring to the Slaughter the VC and the NVA brought to the south.
 
More inferring to the Slaughter the VC and the NVA brought to the south.

the defensive struggle which would not have been precipitated but because of the presence of the USA and its support of diem

our forces were placed there with the intent that they would prevent the peoples' government of the viet minh from ruling the nation

it would appear, from a vietnamese perspective, that the VC and NVA were patriots of their country, by their ridding the nation of an occupying force
 
the defensive struggle which would not have been precipitated but because of the presence of the USA and its support of diem

our forces were placed there with the intent that they would prevent the peoples' government of the viet minh from ruling the nation

it would appear, from a vietnamese perspective, that the VC and NVA were patriots of their country, by their ridding the nation of an occupying force

Expect when the North invaded the South we were already pull out and that doesn't excuse the Innocent Southern Vietnamese.
 
Last edited:
Expect when the North invaded the South we were already pull out and that doesn't excuse the Innocent Southern Vietnamese.

when we turned tail and left the opposition to the VC/NVA, they were easily overcome the NLF established a unified nation
that was their objective
unlike us, they began their efforts having a defined objective

you speak of slaughter, yet the VC had a code of honor in the way they treated the civilians, which code of conduct likely aided their efforts to gain victory

(1) Not to do what is likely to damage the land and crops or spoil the houses and belongings of the people;
(2) Not to insist on buying or borrowing what the people are not willing to sell or lend;
(3) Never to break our word;
(4) Not to do or speak what is likely to make people believe that we hold them in contempt;
(5) To help them in their daily work (harvesting, fetching firewood, carrying water, sewing, etc.)

yes, those who opposed their military and political efforts were dealt with harshly. but there was no wanton slaughter by the VC/NVA ... only wish i could say the same for us (my lai)
 
it would appear, from a vietnamese perspective, that the VC and NVA were patriots of their country, by their ridding the nation of an occupying force

I believe that is how they are viewed today, isn't it?
 
You took Cold War history in high school?

I didn't realize I was dealing with an expert. I only read books and talked to people who lived through it.

um.... people you talked to that lived through it does not count as the majority opinion of every one who lived through it IM SORRY I DIDNT KNOW YOU WERE AN EXPERT. if they are in america ODDS ARE that they left the ****ing country. obviouslly they didnt like it.
 
Uhh seriously.... The communists won. We pulled out (gave up) and said well South your on your own now..
We should of never got in the war...
 
Uhh seriously.... The communists won. We pulled out (gave up) and said well South your on your own now..
We should of never got in the war...

Well, we didn't really, "(give up)". But hey, you believe whatever Communist, revisionist history website you're subscribed to.
 
Well, we didn't really, "(give up)". But hey, you believe whatever Communist, revisionist history website you're subscribed to.

We pulled out, right? Quit fighting? You might be the revisionist.
 
We pulled out, right? Quit fighting? You might be the revisionist.

Not because we had been defeated on the battlefield. Do you fully understand what, "tactical", means and how it applies to warfare? It's ok to admit that you don't. Most of us fully recognize that you don't know near as much as you think you do.
 
We pulled out, right? Quit fighting? You might be the revisionist.

America negotiated a truce and then pulled out in a time of peace, then North Vietnam violated the peace and attacked the south after they were gone. Where in that did America give up?
 
America negotiated a truce and then pulled out in a time of peace, then North Vietnam violated the peace and attacked the south after they were gone. Where in that did America give up?

In that we never stayed in Vietnam long enough to see through what we wanted to be doing there in the first place when we decided to become involved.
 
Not because we had been defeated on the battlefield. Do you fully understand what, "tactical", means and how it applies to warfare? It's ok to admit that you don't. Most of us fully recognize that you don't know near as much as you think you do.

Whether we "won" on the battlefield or not is irrelevant. Hannibal won almost every battle he was in, but he still lost the Second Punic War. He intended to conquer or severely weaken Rome. Instead, Carthage was ruined. We intended to keep Communism out of South Vietnam, and the Commies took Saigon two years later. There may have been a South Vietnam when we left in 1973, but how does that even slightly matter when they collapsed two years later? Nobody disputes the bravery, skill, resources, valor, and sacrifice of our armed forces in the conflict, but actual fighting is only one part of the complex political act known as war.
 
Not because we had been defeated on the battlefield. Do you fully understand what, "tactical", means and how it applies to warfare? It's ok to admit that you don't. Most of us fully recognize that you don't know near as much as you think you do.

You really don't have a clue, do you?
 
You really don't have a clue, do you?

these are the same folks who will throw rocks at stop signs

they can't even figure out who won by noting the current name of what was once saigon: ho chi minh city
 
Last edited:
America negotiated a truce and then pulled out in a time of peace, then North Vietnam violated the peace and attacked the south after they were gone. Where in that did America give up?

Nixon knew that after we pulled out eventually South Vietnam would fall to the north. We didn't stay to ensure the truce wasn't violated, did we? Like we did in Korea? We quit and left the South to fend for themselves.
 
these are the same folks who will throw rocks at stop signs

they can't even figure out who won by noting the current name of what was once saigon: ho chi minh city

There was never anything for us to win in Vietnam. Some people just won't accept that.
 
In that we never stayed in Vietnam long enough to see through what we wanted to be doing there in the first place when we decided to become involved.

We were there for 21 years.

What is it we wanted to be doing there in the first place? What were the goals? That's the issue. We had no clear goal, just a platitude about "fighting Communism".
 
We were there for 21 years.

What is it we wanted to be doing there in the first place? What were the goals? That's the issue. We had no clear goal, just a platitude about "fighting Communism".

that too. We weren't supposed to be there in the first place. We ended up giving up on a mission that we never should have embarked on. That's how I see it.
 
Right my communist believes are just getting a huge hold of me right now.... Right...... But hey i forgot because "technically" America never declared war on anyone in Vietnam, it was a "police action", so America technically never fought a war in the first place. But i think we can all agree it was a "war" but it was a defeat as the US failed in its political objectives, namely the defense of South Vietnam.
 
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.

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

Those that have escaped that I've talked to say the Vietnamese lost the war. Since half the Vietnamese won, half lost, that adds up to zero.

The French haven't won a war since Austerlitz.

The Russians got what they wanted.

Uh, Austerlitz wasn't a war, it was a battle, and I'm also pretty sure that France was the single largest contributor to the victory in World War I, as well as numerous other wars.
 
Back
Top Bottom