The United States won the Vietnam War

[Guest]

We suffered fewer casualties then any other combatant

True, however, other than in the Pacific theater of war, the territory of the United States never came under attack (not including the U-Boats sinking a few ships on the Eastern coast and Admiral Canaris of the Abwehr operating a few a spy rings in the U.S.). As far as Europe is concerned, every major country on that continent came under attack.

[Alexander's Horse]

Yes, the United States won the Vietnam war - and that's why they've been able to maintain a naval base at Cam Ranh Bay to this very day

[steelehc]

Re: Re: The United States won the Vietnam War

Originally posted by Tingkai




This a great thread for a laugh. The US won in Vietnam.

The US gets their asses kicked by a bunch of guys with basic weapons and you call that a victory?

Casualties---

US, KIA-47,072
WIA-----313,616

NV, KIA-1,030,000
WIA------987,000

Yeah, they kicked the **** out of us, alright.

Steele

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
One might argue that the US won because it's objective was to halt the spread of communism. The US held South Vietnam long enough to ensure that communists didn't attempt to make the other countries nearby fall like dominos. They make the commies pay so dearly for South Vietnam, that communist aggression in the region was deterred. Of course, that's just a view.

Academics rubbish this theory but I think it does have something to it. The war in Vietnam did help defeat communist expansionism in South East Asia. I have no doubt about that. And I have lived up there.

[Tingkai]

Re: Re: Re: The United States won the Vietnam War

Originally posted by steelehc



Casualties---

US, KIA-47,072
WIA-----313,616

NV, KIA-1,030,000
WIA------987,000

Yeah, they kicked the **** out of us, alright.

Steele

And how many of the Vietnamese dead and wounded were civilians?

[BeBMan]

Re: Re: Re: The United States won the Vietnam War

Originally posted by steelehc

Casualties---

US, KIA-47,072
WIA-----313,616

NV, KIA-1,030,000
WIA------987,000

Yeah, they kicked the **** out of us, alright.

Steele

Well, but "they" reached their goals, the USA did not. And if casualties are the only indicator for winning/not winning, then the Soviet Union must have lost WWII...

Harpax

Considering the technology that existed in the ancient world, the Roman Empire can also be considered the greatest military power,

Has your user name something to do with ancient Roman navy hardware? Just curious...

[Asher]

It depends how you define victory.

If you go by kill ratios, the US certainly won.
If you go by objectives, then the US certainly lost.

The US gained absolutely nothing by their "invasion" and ended up leaving without making any real progress. It was a defeat in my eyes.

Not that it matters.

[Dis]

we did win the Tet offensive by the way. The only minor victory that the NVA could clamin in the Tet offensive was they were a force to be reconend with and would never go away. The U.S. took back all ground lost in the Tet offensive.

[Dis]

excuse the spelling, I'm doing 3 things at once.

[Tingkai]

Re: Re: Re: The United States won the Vietnam War

Originally posted by steelehc



Casualties---

US, KIA-47,072
WIA-----313,616

NV, KIA-1,030,000
WIA------987,000

Yeah, they kicked the **** out of us, alright.

Steele

According to an AP report, April 4, 1995, the Vietnamese gov't lists casualties as:
4 million civilians (killed and wounded)
1.1 million KIA
600,000 wounded
Those stats apply to the entire war of independence, a 21 year period.

I found the report at http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html#press
I cannot vouch for the accuracy.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
One might argue that the US won because it's objective was to halt the spread of communism. The US held South Vietnam long enough to ensure that communists didn't attempt to make the other countries nearby fall like dominos.

You're right, if you don't count Cambodia and Laos.

[Seeker]

"The US held South Vietnam long enough to ensure that communists didn't attempt to make the other countries nearby fall like dominos"

Yeah, that's why Cambodia and Laos were both invaded within three years of 1975...

US Objectives in Vietname conflict:
-To preserve the indepedence of their client-state of south viet nam.
-To prevent 'Communist subversion' of South Viet Nam as part of the 'containment policy'.

Success Rate:

-Failed. South Vietnam no longer exists.

-Failed. Communism was popular enough amongst the poor of South Vietnam that the majority or at the very least a big chunk were at least sympathetic to the North, even when it was not in their personal best interests to be (i.e. Operation Phoenix era). The attempt to 'sell America' to the the average Vietnamese peasant failed miserably.

[Dis]

those are political objectives. who cares about those

Allies had objectives in ww1, none of those panned out.

[steelehc]

The "objectives" of the Allies, or indeed, all parties involved in WW1 were simple. Keep your empire, and take what you could from the "other guys." For Britain, France, and Japan, these panned out, at least in theory. Britain and France gained "mandates" in the middle east, and Japan took over all of Germany's colonies. The US didn't lose anything, didn't gain much. The USSR got ra*ped. Germany made out badly in general terms, but was in a better position after the war then before. Austria-Hungary no longer existed.

Steele

[kolpo]

double post