Vietnam War

Well its to be expected but still the mindset at home changed because of it, and like what how many civilians died throughout the war.[/quote:1vcmgw7k]
American soldiers did not exactly cover themselves with the fruits of moral superiority in that war...[/quote:1vcmgw7k]

Kinda hard to when the people back home are throwing rocks and hateing you for it.

Care to explain?

When we left Vietnam it was on the conditions agreed upon in the Paris Peace Accords, which was bilaterally approved, and which guaranteed the independence of South Vietnam. The entire reason we went to war was to guarantee the independence of South Vietnam. Our objective was never to destroy the North or take away their independence. The conditions upon which we withdrew were our victory conditions. That the North Vietnamese broke their agreement and are traitorous scum doesn't change the fact that when the United States exited the war, we did so on winning terms. The whole "Peace with Honor" thing? Yeah, that's what they're talking about.

Leave it to commies to go back on their word and forcibly subjugate the South.

And just practically speaking, we didn't lose a battle in the war. American kill/death ratios were obscenely high, and at no point in the war were we in danger of losing. People like to say we lost because after we had already signed a peace treaty and left the country the NVA stormed into South Vietnam, but you'd have to be an absolute ponce to think that there's any truth in that statement.

Even Americans, if they are taught about Vietnam at all, are ignorant of the North's double-crossing nature and our conditional victory.

I don't consider those actual wars, cause they're not. They are more like the "crusade against drugs and terror" :lol: .

You make excellent points with both the North Vietnamese double crossing nature and that we never lost the battle, even the famed Tet offensive coast 10 times more viet Cong then U.S troops. However i will argue we did lose the support at home and that really effect the outcome at home.

Under that, it would have to be proven that the Vietcong intended to cause a shift of homefront U.S. support away from the war.
In any other case it is just a coincidence and pure luck.

We may not have lost the war in Vietnam but we lost the war at home.
Also, its kind of sad that we got what was effectively a stalemate in that peace treaty, after around 10 years of fighting.

The peace treaty we signed with the North Vietnamese stated that they would leave South Vietnam alone. Our goal in the Vietnam war was to protect South Vietnam. WHEN WE HAD PULLED OUT SOUTH VIETNAM WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN SAFE, thus by the time we pulled out we had achieved our goal. It was only after that that North Vietnam broke the treaty.

So why didn't we go back in again? Cause we lost the war at home an were trying to save face.

So why didn't we go back in again? Cause we lost the war at home an were trying to save face.[/quote:2a04rhyk]
I dont care if we got a moral loss or a moral win or a moral tie. The fact is that we never actually lost the war and technically if you wanna go further like Kali said we signed the peace treaty on winning terms.

I dont care if we got a moral loss or a moral win or a moral tie. The fact is that we never actually lost the war and technically if you wanna go further like Kali said we signed the peace treaty on winning terms.[/quote:10azkjc1]
We lost because we didn't protect our "allies" South Vietnam when they were invaded again.

It doesn't really matter who you think "won" or "lost" the entire conflict was just pointless for us to be in.

May I ask, whom are you trying to educate?

AFTER we ended the war. They broke the treaty. When WE ended OUR PART in the war WE had achieved OUR GOAL.

It was indeed pointless.

Holy FUCK I'm on a LOLLERcoaster!

OUR GOAL was to protect South Vietnam from communist forces. We failed when we failed to honor our alliance.

When we offically ended the war we had achieved our goal. Therefore we technically won.

AGREED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well if you look at it from a treaty stance and protecting are allies until then we achieved are goal, tough once we left South Vietnam was doomed and it could be argued we should have invaded North Vietnam to start with.

But our NEW goal was to help protect South Vietnam, which we failed at. We should have been at war from the moment the North Vietnamese troops crossed the border AGAIN but we weren't were we? Which shows we knew we would have lost anyways and we didn't want to get embroiled in another useless war. WE SAVED FACE!