• 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!

Congress' intelligence heads: Taliban stronger

Navy Pride said:
If LBJ and his cronnies we could have won that war in two weeks.........we had 500,000 men there...........
Click to expand...

Could of would of should of...... Tried to bomb the North into submission, but did not work. Tried to slowly escalate the war, did not work. The majority of Vietnamese did not support us there, was not a popular war in the US after a few years, and from the get go many people were calling it a unwinable war.
 
Hatuey said:
Yo... I got a better idea... let´s get the **** out. Any of them try any **** in our country? We blow them back to the... what comes before the stone age? They´re there anyways so we can´t send them back to that period.
Click to expand...

Yeah! Let's get the **** outta there...so we can go right back in 10 years. Awesome strategy!

I mean, hey! Every generation needs it's war. Right?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Could of would of should of...... Tried to bomb the North into submission, but did not work. Tried to slowly escalate the war, did not work. The majority of Vietnamese did not support us there, was not a popular war in the US after a few years, and from the get go many people were calling it a unwinable war.
Click to expand...

Well, actually, we forced the North to submit to signing a peace treaty. But, don't let the facts get in the way of your talking points.
 
apdst said:
Yeah! Let's get the **** outta there...so we can go right back in 10 years. Awesome strategy!

I mean, hey! Every generation needs it's war. Right?
Click to expand...

Or we just stay out for good because its not our business, their citizens dont want us there, or we are not the police of the world.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Could of would of should of...... Tried to bomb the North into submission, but did not work. Tried to slowly escalate the war, did not work. The majority of Vietnamese did not support us there, was not a popular war in the US after a few years, and from the get go many people were calling it a unwinable war.
Click to expand...

Listen my left wing friend............The people in the south were mostly farmers not soldiers........I spent 13 months there I know, In addition a couple of low yeild nukes strategically placed would have brought the NVN and the Viet Cong to their knees just like it did with the Japanese.........
 
Navy Pride said:
Listen my left wing friend............
Click to expand...
I have been

The people in the south were mostly farmers not soldiers.......
Click to expand...
Ok what is your point? What does their occupation have anything to do with it?

.I spent 13 months there I know, In addition a couple of low yeild nukes strategically placed would have brought the NVN and the Viet Cong to their knees just like it did with the Japanese.........
Click to expand...
You wanted to use nuclear bombs? What would the point be? Take away the people of Vietnam's right to self determination? What were we fighting for?
 
apdst said:
Yeah! Let's get the **** outta there...so we can go right back in 10 years. Awesome strategy!

I mean, hey! Every generation needs it's war. Right?
Click to expand...

If you actually look at Afghan history, the British and the Russians get ****ed over every time they think it's their business what goes on in that ****hole.
 
Navy Pride said:
Listen my left wing friend............The people in the south were mostly farmers not soldiers........I spent 13 months there I know, In addition a couple of low yeild nukes strategically placed would have brought the NVN and the Viet Cong to their knees just like it did with the Japanese.........
Click to expand...

What did the Vietnamese ever do to us before the conflict that even remotely compares to what the Japanese did to us?
And since we so called lost the Vietnam Conflict how many Vietnamese terrorists have attacked us?


If you are so concerned about the Vietnamese why don't you get off your butt and go over there and doing something about it. You can easily fly into Vietnam and carry out a mission.
 
Navy Pride said:
Go look in my account at my friends......I see you have visited my account before Redress.......
Click to expand...

Do you know what changing the topic is NP? It's what you did here.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
I have been


Ok what is your point? What does their occupation have anything to do with it?


You wanted to use nuclear bombs? What would the point be? Take away the people of Vietnam's right to self determination? What were we fighting for?
Click to expand...

I was fighting for the South and as it did in Japan a couple of low yeild nukes would have actually saved lives.
 
Navy Pride said:
I was fighting for the South and as it did in Japan a couple of low yeild nukes would have actually saved lives.
Click to expand...

Nukeing a country that posed no threat to us from the get go, and only was considered bad because our anti-imperialist policy in Asia was reversed after FDR passed.
You have yet to answer the question. What were we fighting for?
And how would that make us look nuking a third world country of rice farmers and impoverished people because we didnt like the way the country was moving.
And wasnt it the US that decided not to allow the plecibit which would allow the Vietnamese on how to govern themselves? The US said no no no because the people would democratically elect Ho as the leader of Vietnam under DRV rule?
So answer me this you have yet to answer a single question i have asked you. What were we fighting for? What did the occupation of people in the South have anything to do with this?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
What were we fighting for? What did the occupation of people in the South have anything to do with this?
Click to expand...

To stop the spread of communism. You're right, most South Vietnamese would rather have been subjects of a communist regime than fight for their freedom.

digsbe said:
Wasn't it Nixon (a Republican) who worked to end the Vietnam war, Navy?
Click to expand...

After two democrat administrations were committed to an anti-communist policy, Kennedy, another democrat, involved the US in the conflict. LBJ, another democrat, engaged in a full-fledged military conflict, and made sure made sure victory was unattainable because of his "police action" rather than "win the war" policies.

Actually, Nixon tried to win the conflict by bombing North Vietnam after taking office. However, public opinion had long since waned, especially after the Tet Offensive in January '68. But yes, Nixon finally ended the conflict, which had become un-winnable before he took office.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Do you know what changing the topic is NP? It's what you did here.
Click to expand...

I did not change it you did when you insinuated I had no friends....I proved you wrong...........
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060469166 said:
After two democrat administrations were committed to an anti-communist policy, Kennedy, another democrat, involved the US in the conflict. LBJ, another democrat, engaged in a full-fledged military conflict, and made sure made sure victory was unattainable because of his "police action" rather than "win the war" policies.

Actually, Nixon tried to win the conflict by bombing North Vietnam after taking office. However, public opinion had long since waned, especially after the "Tet Offensive in January '68. But yes, Nixon finally ended the conflict, which had become un-winnable before he took office.
Click to expand...

Uhh to say the LBJ was not trying to win, but Nixon did because he bombed the North. But LBJ started bombing the North long before Nixon. Operation Rolling Thunder... Bombed the **** out of the North. Also we were engaged in a war of attrition, slowly trying to wear down the North and bring them to their knees both LBJ and Nixon took this strategy... But yes i agree that the war was unwinnable when Nixon took over it was unwinnable from the get go...
 
Last edited:
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060469166 said:
After two democrat administrations were committed to an anti-communist policy, Kennedy, another democrat, involved the US in the conflict. LBJ, another democrat, engaged in a full-fledged military conflict, and made sure made sure victory was unattainable because of his "police action" rather than "win the war" policies.

Actually, Nixon tried to win the conflict by bombing North Vietnam after taking office. However, public opinion had long since waned, especially after the "Tet Offensive in January '68. But yes, Nixon finally ended the conflict, which had become un-winnable before he took office.
Click to expand...

Uhh to say the LBJ was not trying to win, but Nixon did because he bombed the North. But LBJ started bombing the North long before Nixon. Operation Rolling Thunder... Bombed the **** out of the North. Also we were engaged in a war of attrition, slowly trying to wear down the North and bring them to their knees both LBJ and Nixon took this strategy... But yes i agree that the war was unwinnable when Nixon took over it was unwinnable from the get go...
 
Navy Pride said:
I did not change it you did when you insinuated I had no friends....I proved you wrong...........
Click to expand...

No I did not in any way do that. Now you are back to making **** up.
 
Crosscheck said:
What did the Vietnamese ever do to us before the conflict that even remotely compares to what the Japanese did to us?
And since we so called lost the Vietnam Conflict how many Vietnamese terrorists have attacked us?


If you are so concerned about the Vietnamese why don't you get off your butt and go over there and doing something about it. You can easily fly into Vietnam and carry out a mission.
Click to expand...

I was in country for 13 months and made 2 deployments a total of 20 months there.....How about you?
 
Navy Pride said:
I was in country for 13 months and made 2 deployments a total of 20 months there.....How about you?
Click to expand...

Cool. Thank you for the service. But WHAT WAS THE POINT OF GOING TO WAR IN VIETNAM?
 
Redress said:
No I did not in any way do that. Now you are back to making **** up.
Click to expand...


Your words Redress...Try and deny them:

Let's see: there is you, and....

Well, you take your posts seriously I guess, so that is something. Even our most partisan people don't play juvenile hackish games like you do. Something to take pride in.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Cool. Thank you for the service. But WHAT WAS THE POINT OF GOING TO WAR IN VIETNAM?
Click to expand...


According to four consecutive democratic administrations in the US, the point was to stop the cancerous spread of communism.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
I was in country for 13 months and made 2 deployments a total of 20 months there.....How about you?
Click to expand...


Enlisted, officer? Were you part of the brown water navy? Thank you for your service to America.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060469206 said:
According to four consecutive democraticadministrations in the US, the point was to stop the cancerous spread of communism.
Click to expand...

Yes. But dont act like the Republicans are the innocent little boys in this because they were pushing for war in Vietnam as well. But what happened when we left? Where did it spread? Was the domino theory correct? Was it going to spread all throughout Asia, all the way to Australia?
 
Navy Pride said:
Ask JFK and LBJ both dems that.......they are the ones who got us involved in the war............
Click to expand...

I'm asking you. The one who seems to be all Pro-Vietnam war. I want your opinion. Im asking you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom