The us has never lost a war

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

FRYSLAN BOPPE

[Black Op 0]

speak english

[FallenPaladin 0]

Back to the topic

America lost the vietnam war. Everytime a invading or foreign force has to retreat from another country, it has lost a war. I remember videos in which the americans threw helicopers and planes from their carriers into the ocean because they had not enough space for the american civilians which fled from vietnam in a hurry.

I`m 120% sure that was a war the americans lost!

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

Actually i just did. The English language comes out of the Frisian language i just used. So actually English isn't a real language, but a dialect from the Frisian language.

But you are right. We all must stop now and behave.

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FallenPaladin @ Feb. 27 2002,14:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Back to the topic  

America lost the vietnam war. Everytime a invading or foreign force has to retreat from another country, it has lost a war. I remember videos in which the americans threw helicopers and planes from their carriers into the ocean because they had not enough space for the american civilians which fled from vietnam in a hurry.

I`m 120% sure that was a war the americans lost!<span id='postcolor'>

I agree. But i find that most of the American movies and series of the Vietnamwar, they are the so called heroes and never loose a battle. I found Platoon very good, and i think they lost in that movie but i cannot remember it very clear. But America did loose the war in Vietnam.

[ran 0]

ok , now , to re-launch the discussion :

the americans have pulled out because of the jungle training and tactics and the numeral superiority of the vietcong

the american could have used ten times more napalm and orange agent that the guerrilla would still hide in tunnels and foxholes

the vietnamese loses are very big , but they continued to fight because of the fanatism of the chief of the communist organisation in north vietnam and the fanatism of all a nation

[Longinius 1]

"I agree. But i find that most of the American movies and series of the Vietnamwar, they are the so called heroes and never loose a battle. I found Platoon very good, and i think they lost in that movie but i cannot remember it very clear. But America did loose the war in Vietnam."

Well the fact is that America won most of the battles but they lost the war. So its not odd that the soldiers usually win the battles in the movies.

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

America just wasn't prepared to fight an enemy which knew its surroundings. They knew how to fight in the jungle, and the Americans didn't, and that is why they lost. Bush didn't make the same mistake by launching a full ground assault on the Taliban. The Russians did, and they lost. The Taliban tought they could defeat America if they did ground assault. Luckily Bush was smart enough to bomb everything first.

[Longinius 1]

I doubt Bush did the bombing, nor was the one who decided that was the best course to take.

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gorgi Knootewoot @ Feb. 27 2002,14:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I agree. But i find that most of the American movies and series of the Vietnamwar, they are the so called heroes and never loose a battle. I found Platoon very good, and i think they lost in that movie but i cannot remember it very clear. But America did loose the war in Vietnam.<span id='postcolor'>

One of the last scenes in Platoon is when the american forces are overun by the viet cong. The americans can only defeat them because their officer in charge orders an airstrike at the coordinates of his HQ. If a battle is won to such a high price it`s no victory you can be proud of. That`s for sure!

[ran 0]

bush bombed the afghanistan ???? let me laugh

during ten years , the russian aviation deversed milions tons of bombs

[Angry Radish 0]

OK, I'm stumped.

I can do all sorts of rendering and calculations on this laptop.

It's not a super powerhouse, but it's not a wuss either (P3-850 w/512m, and a 16meg vid card) , so why do the animated .gifs in Rans' sig bring it to it's knees? I just can't figure it out!

I'll be scrolling down the page, smooth as can be, till I hit that damned sig, then it's like a freeking slideshow! AAHHHH!!!!

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

From what i have seen on TV, the Amerikanskies did perform bombing raids. Maybe Bush didn't make the decisions, afteral he also choked on a pretzal thing.

[Black Op 0]

The Us werent allowed to win the Vietnam war, if they had been allowed to invade North Vietnam they could have cot of all the NVA's supplys, and also if they had bombed the North Vietnam citys to hell they may have won

[Longinius 1]

May have, could have...but they didn't. They lost.

[hbk 0]

Right, the US *could* have won the war, but, fact is, they lost.

BTW, they lost mainly because of the "red's" support.

That's why they helped the afgans against the ruskies, kind of revenge.

As of this, Bush would have never won the war if ruskies gave support to talibans ... hopefully they didin't.

... and if the Massoud's rebels were on the other side ...

Yeah, as we say in france, "avec des *si* on mettrait Paris en bouteille"

Literally, "with lots of *if* we could put Paris in a bottle"

[nordin dk 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gorgi Knootewoot @ Feb. 27 2002,15:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">From what i have seen on TV, the Amerikanskies did perform bombing raids. Maybe Bush didn't make the decisions, afteral he also choked on a pretzal thing.<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah right, it was a pretzel.

That probably the most farout story I've heard in many years.

My guess is, he got pissdrunk and fell and slammed his head, so they had to come up with an exscuse for him to have a large bruise. Enter "the pretzel".

What a complete moron that guy is.

[ChickenHawk 0]

The US won the battles and then they left and let the VC take the land. They flew in with choppers, dropped off the troops, had a fight then flew away again.

If they wanted to win the war they should have taken land and held it. + they should have treated the civies with respect instread of shooting anyone who they thought was VC and blowing up all the hooches in sight.

The brits fought a similar war in Borneo and it worked because they were friendly with the locals, they held the land, they killed the right people and their troops werent conscripts/untrained.

Most of the guys in Nam were the right stuff, but in the wrong war.

[Akira 0]

Just some things wanted to say...it took me an hour to be able to reply to this thread so whether its been said or not I'm gonna say it!

The Americans retreated from Breeds Hill and the hill next to it Bunker Hill, but only after having drubbed the British with frightful casualties (those darned Americans wouldn't stand in a straight line....they kept hiding behind stuff!. It was important because the colonials actually stood up to British regulars....something no one thought they would do (especially the colonials).

Whatever YOU guys may think Vietnam was, it was never declared a war, so it ISN'T a war. Also as has been pointed out it was more of another stalemate then an outright loss. South Vietnam wasn't lost until AFTER America left, and AFTER the Paris Treaty was signed....it is considered a loss more from the American psyche point of view.....NOT because of what YOU think. The American military more than held its own against the North, even though its hands were tied by the politicians and "stragegists" (who were usually one and the same)....

The War of 1812 was not a "backstab" move by the Americans...we were stictly isolationist as far as European affairs go. The crisis came about because of, among other things, unlawful British impressment of US sailors. It is rightly considered the Second War For Independence. And the military was about as effective in this one as it was in the first. 1812 was another political victory that insured our independence....but we won it nonetheless.....and let us not forget the ass whoopin' we gave the British at New Orleans.....(yes yes it was AFTER the treaty but that is irrelevent as all combatants involved thought the war was still on)....

Think thats it....

{EDIT}

Oh yeah....one more thing getting completly tired of the "Bush is a moron" comments that somehow always pop up in any discussion whatever it be, and no matter how irrelevant to the discussion....

Yeah, like YOUR leaders are complete brainiacs or something....puh-lease....like ALL leaders (yes YOURS too) he has made mistakes and made brilliant moves.....so spare me....

{/EDIT}

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nordin dk @ Feb. 27 2002,15:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My guess is, he got pissdrunk and fell and slammed his head, so they had to come up with an exscuse for him to have a large bruise. Enter "the pretzel".

What a complete moron that guy is.<span id='postcolor'>

That was it, a pretzel

Yes, i do believe it is a fake story. I find him a creepy little gnome that is evil and wants to take over the world. But that is my opinion.

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gorgi Knootewoot @ Feb. 27 2002,16:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nordin dk @ Feb. 27 2002,15:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My guess is, he got pissdrunk and fell and slammed his head, so they had to come up with an exscuse for him to have a large bruise. Enter "the pretzel".

What a complete moron that guy is.<span id='postcolor'>

That was it, a pretzel  

Yes, i do believe it is a fake story. I find him a creepy little gnome that is evil and wants to take over the world. But that is my opinion.<span id='postcolor'>

Sounds like a quite irrational fear you got there....

[AntiPasta 0]

c'mon STFU about Bush being stupid or at least back it up with some facts...

I think Bush has handled the 9-11 crisis quite well and we mustn't forget that he's the president of the AMERICANS so if he wants to act in the benefit of het American people (lowering tax, increasing defense budget, not paying UN contribution) he just does it and doesn't give a damn about you British or Dutch or whatever...

[Longinius 1]

"Whatever YOU guys may think Vietnam was, it was never declared a war, so it ISN'T a war."

Honestly I don't care what it was declared. Ask a Vietnamese survivor and I am pretty sure they will say they lived through a war.

If you use artillery, tanks, bombs, napalm, chemical warfare and massive amounts of troops its a war no matter what you wish to call it.

"Also as has been pointed out it was more of another stalemate then an outright loss. South Vietnam wasn't lost until AFTER America left, and AFTER the Paris Treaty was signed...."

Just because the Americans ran off before the south was overrun doesnt make it any less of a defeat.

"c'mon STFU about Bush being stupid or at least back it up with some facts..."

I don't know if he is stupid. He sure is no public speaker though. And he has a scary tendency to mix words up and cause unrest in both politics and economy to the likes of NO other world leader in history. Does that make him stupid? Your call...

"I think Bush has handled the 9-11 crisis quite well and we mustn't forget that he's the president of the AMERICANS so if he wants to act in the benefit of het American people (lowering tax, increasing defense budget, not paying UN contribution) he just does it and doesn't give a damn about you British or Dutch or whatever..."

I don't think Bush acts all that much on his own. He is the figure head but I doubt he calls the shots. He just takes them to the public. That is the way it has been with most presidents.

[ChickenHawk 0]

c'mon STFU about Bush being stupid or at least back it up with some facts...

He told the japs to lower the value of the Yen. He also said Korea was evil just before he was gana visit it.

[Wobble 1]

Vietnam and Korea...one US definitely lost, the other a stalemate, no winning

so.. the US didnt win Korea??  LOL.. better read up on yer history..

ya notice how in the olympics there is North and SOUTH Korea..  if the US lost the Korean war there would only be Korea..  thats what the entire war was about.. NK was trying to take over and assimilate SK.. NK was communist and SK was not.. the whole reason the US went was to keep SK free of NK and to this day it is... cant hardly call that losing can ya. though SK and NK never signed a peace treaty the US and NATO kept NK from overrunning SK.. and thats all its goal was.. there was that one nutty general who wanted to overrun NK and attack china.. but he was 'retired' for his ideas and the goals of the US being there was met, it got China and NK to sign an armistae and it left.. and to this day NK as not taken over SK..

and the US didnt lose vietnam... geo-politics lost it..  the US had every means needed by which to smash the NVA but the USSR and China were threatening to join if the US did...

it was really twisted..  pilots of strike aircraft were forbidden to bomb SAM sites that were being setup because they would kill Chinese and USSR people who were helping set them up.. so they had to let them get set up and then get shot at by them.. and THEN *Maby* they would be allowed to attack..

also US planes were forbidded to bomb the places housing THOUSANDS of SAM sites that were shipped in.. so they would see all this shit sitting on the docs and were not allowed to blow it up..  then the next day its deployed and shooting at them.

then there was the surrounding countries.. by which the NVA CHEATED.. (yes you can cheat in war) it was agreed by BOTH sides in the beginning that the conflict would not spread to surrounding laos and cambodia.. and then as soon as the US ariforce began pounding the shit out of the NVA supply forces they broke the agreement and rerouted through BOTH of the countried only months earlier they agreed they would stay out of...  eventually the US  *sort of* did a few ops into the countries but was still held back y the agreement, and not wanting to escalate the war..

so waht do we have..

A: not allowed to shoot at the enemy untill they are nice and set up and and shooting AT YOU.

B: cant go into a neighbor country to attack, but the enemy can sit in that country in relative safty and stockpile and prepare their forces with no real fear of attack..

who COULD win a 'war' like that?

the US didnt win in Vietnam but if didnt lose in the conventional sense of losing..  

oddly enough the US almost NEVER lost a battle in vietnam.... but things were so screwed from the get-go that no matter how well the US did there was really no way it could actually win..  it was a real square peg/round hole situation..

but one thing did accomplish was desert storm.. desert storm was a cumulation of all the things about centralized control and combat field planning learned in vietnam.. and as we know the Gulf war went pretty damn good for the US and NATO..