Redpill me about the Vietnam war, Sup Forums.
How is it possible for the most advanced military of the world having access to millions of trained soldiers, air support, nukes, long range artillery and everything else you could possible need, to lose a war to fucking Vietnamese rice farmers?
Rules of engagement
Fpbp
rules of engagement custom-fit to ensure a loss at every turn. By our own government.
>environment
>resistance to straight genocide of all north vietnamese
>guerilla warfare, especially reserved for the jungles and night time
>tenacity of the natives
We would have had to slaughter ALL of them to win. We could have done it, but we didn't, and engagements were reserved to having reasonable intel of commie sympathy and retaliation to ambush
It wasn't want to be won because there was no wincon, it was playing a deck built around Divine Intervention. The goal was to sell military hardware and protect agricultural interests and both those things were done masterfully. So it was a complete success.
It wasnt a real war
It was a tax excuse and a commie killing adventure
A zero sum game
sgt elias wouldnt let the men break the rules
its impossible to win against a guerrilla force in those circumstances without breaking the rules
The awfully equipped Soviets helped destroy the US army.
Same thing with the soviets in Afghanistan.
Peasant beat two superpowers.
Because of pictures like the one you posted. The US was killing a lot more Vietnamese than the other way around, but the public became demoralised to the point where they didn't support the way. The media won it by providing uncensored photos and footage of the horrors of war for the first time. Nowadays, reporters are kept away from the warzone and news networks wont play disturbing footage.
*support the war
Honestly, I want Rainbow Dash to stick her 4 hooves in my anus
/)
The threat of Soviet nukes.
It's not particularly difficult to understand. The failures came from the exact same sources, that resulted in failures of mode war.
The media presence spinning information in order to inflame social belief in opposition to a conflict.
The political leviathan, that places it's fingers in every organisation, meddling as it sees fit.
Suddenly you can't drop those bombs that would be effective, suddenly those artillery pieces are useless, suddenly you are told to hold your fire instead of fire at will.
It's the same reasons the wars in the Middle East were ridiculous. International laws blended with the previously mentioned issues, resulted in an over regulated military force.
Also in regards to Vietnam, the French foreign legion that had been fighting communist forces on the Chinese border following ww2, wrote to the US generals asking for a meeting.
They wished to pass on the tactical information they had learnt about the very same enemy to US would face.
Instead the hierarchy ignored the request, sending soldiers against traps and tactics that they could have prepared against.
Same goes for American revolution.
>Lose
Define lose. Our mission was to not allow the fall of South Vietnam to the North. So long as we were present, we succeeded. US strategic command was NOT allowed to make serious gains across the border into North Vietnam for fear of Chinese retaliation; our role in the war was almost strictly defensive.
So I fail to see how we lost. As long as we were there, we consistently came out on top of practically every engagement with the NVA and VC. Kill to death ratios and strategic gains to defeats were laughably one sided in favor of the US. By every measurable regard except territorial gains (because again, we were NOT allowed to make offensives into North Vietnam), we kicked their asses hard. The only reason we stopped was because the war was no longer worth our time, money, and blood.
Our strategic objective in the war was to prevent the fall of South Vietnam and bleed the North of war materials. For the duration of our involvement, I would say the war was a resounding success.
>So long as we were present, we succeeded.
Yeah because you pulled out like a bitch when you realized that Saigon was surrounded and you could no longer hold it.
>The only reason we stopped was because the war was no longer worth our time, money, and blood.
You have lost everything except your last defense point in Saigon, that's when you pulled out. You didn't just happen to suddenly pull out half way while you were present all over Vietnam. Stop spinning it like you somehow didn't get forced back and had to pull out to save the life of your soldiers that were still left.
Hundreds of billions worth of military gear used up, ten thousands of dead US soldiers, massive damage to the global image of the US and having to pay reparations to this day for you chemical warfare for what? So that the communists could have southern Vietnam in the end anyways. Top fucking lel.
Because the government kneecapped the military's ability to actually wage war
If they took the chains off it would have been done in 3 years tops
the media
the risk of WWIII (ROE designed to spare soviet advisors ended up sparing the whole NVA command structure because the russians knew we were planning around them which meant as soon as a russian walked into a building you couldn't put a mk82 through it anymore)
the unwillingness to just kill 'em all
"victory" in a war requires destroying the enemy's ability to fight; that is, destroy chains of command, nerve centers, communication ability, will to fight. if you can't do that, you can't win; at least against commies. you can kill commies at 100:1 K/D but their leaders don't give a fuck and will keep shoveling them in until you reach your preset kill limit.
commies don't give a fuck about losses, so unless you kill all of them, or can kill the leaders to force a surrender, the war will continue. forever.
I'd like to consider it. First I need to know what the goal of that war was. Did U.S. attain it?
Media influence
we had to hold back because the media was pushing the hippie narrative really fucking hard and so anti-war stuff was great and cool
in order for a nation to win a war, the entire nation has to fight the war, that includes the media.
This was the beginning of cultural marxism.
The media got a hold of war footage and broadcast it to rile up the hippies.
Thus preventing us from setting the entire country on fire, and ushering in this new kind of unwinnable warfare we call counter insurgency.
The goal was a prevention of the "domino effect", which was a theory that if communism was left unperturbed the Asian nations would fall as "dominos" and communism was spread
So the goal was to prevent the spread of communism. When we left Vietnam became communist within weeks, but it did not spread past there
Americans could have easily slaughtered entire vietnamese population if they wanted, their K/D ratio was about 1:20. But the goal was not to genocide all gooks, but to help South Vietnam win. And that's where the core of all problems was, because South Vietnam was shit and fought very weakly. Commies were much more ready to fight and commit sacrifices, unlike the South.
Both USA and VN won
VN won because today there's no US troop in Saigon or Hanoi
USA won because there's Starbucks and McDonald over here
Kill yourself you fucking reddit nigger
Looks like those colours run after all?
There were 2 actual wars
We won the first one. Went home
Second one happened south Vietnam lost
There you go