Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
What are the details?
Moderator: Community Team
Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
What are the details?
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
nagerous wrote:Sure you coulda won if you decided to nuke the crap out of Vietnam, but then what would have been achieved?
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
What are the details?
Crazyirishman wrote:Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
What are the details?
We spent about 350 Billion in 1955-1975 US Dollars, which is like like 2.4 trillion dollars today, also conveniently.
Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
What are the details?
We spent about 350 Billion in 1955-1975 US Dollars, which is like like 2.4 trillion dollars today, also conveniently.
But is it true that we "ran out of money"? Or did our Congress pull the rug out from under the soldiers feet?
Symmetry wrote:
Source- wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prager_University
You have been conned.
This ain't some sort of different view- it isn't a university, it's a scam by a right wing shock jock. Accept that you got conned, and move on dude.
thegreekdog wrote:Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:Phatscotty wrote:Crazyirishman wrote:We ran out of money, that's how it was lost.
What are the details?
We spent about 350 Billion in 1955-1975 US Dollars, which is like like 2.4 trillion dollars today, also conveniently.
But is it true that we "ran out of money"? Or did our Congress pull the rug out from under the soldiers feet?
You're such a great small government guy, PS. Did you read smegal's list?
smegal69 wrote:Phatscotty i think you were not hugged enough as a baby, did your parents rock you asleep listening to Richard Nixon,
stop been brain washed...... watching to much Fox News and Prager University has made you even more fucked up.
you had lost that war even before you started it, and some how i don't think it will be your last
kentington wrote:nagerous wrote:Sure you coulda won if you decided to nuke the crap out of Vietnam, but then what would have been achieved?
There would be no debate over winning or losing? Or would there...
Symmetry wrote:I'm inclined to agree with Smegal, Phatscotty needs a hug.
notyou2 wrote:Symmetry wrote:I'm inclined to agree with Smegal, Phatscotty needs a hug.
I hugged him in the PS support thread.
It’s ironic that in spite of all the media hype and hullabaloo about the “Viet Cong” and the “American Soldiers” both were absent from the final battles for South Vietnam. During the “Tet” battles of 1968, the so-called “Viet Cong” had been literally bludgeoned to death on the streets of the cities, towns, and hamlets of South Vietnam. The Americans had left under the terms of the Paris Peace Agreements, and were then barred by the US Congress, from ever returning. The end came in the form of a cross border invasion. Two conventional armies fought it out using strategies and tactics as old as warfare itself.
A brief word about the South Vietnamese government lacking support from the people, and the supposed “popular support” for the communists. During the 1968 Tet Offensive the communists attacked 155 cities, towns and hamlets in South Vietnam. In not one instance did the people rise up to support the communists. The people did rise, but in revulsion and resistance to the invaders. The general uprising, envisioned by the communists, was a complete illusion. At the end of thirty days, not one single communist flag was flying over any of those 155 cities, towns and hamlets. The citizens of South Vietnam, no matter how apathetic they may have appeared toward their own government, turned out to be overwhelmingly anti-communist. In the end they had to be conquered by conventional divisions, supported by conventional tanks and artillery that was being maneuvered in accordance with the ancient principles of warfare. But then, as with mathematics, certain rules apply in war, and military victories are not won by violating military principles.
Note
General Dung’s Great Spring Victory was spearheaded by a total of 700 (maneuverable) Soviet tanks, i.e., Soviet tanks, burning Soviet fuel and firing Soviet ammunition. By comparison, the South Vietnamese had only 352 US supplied tanks and they were committed to guarding the entire country’s borders with Cambodia, Laos and North Vietnam. However, because of US Congressional action, the ARVN were critically short of fuel, ammunition and spare parts with which to maintain and support these tanks.
Sackett58 wrote:kentington wrote:nagerous wrote:Sure you coulda won if you decided to nuke the crap out of Vietnam, but then what would have been achieved?
There would be no debate over winning or losing? Or would there...
Return to Out, out, brief candle!
Users browsing this forum: jusplay4fun, kennyp72, mookiemcgee