Why has America stopped winning wars?

[BlackCat]

Who cares wether it's obama/bush that ordered/executed the withdrawal of US soldiers from Iraq. Fact is that ISIS can't be defeated by US/european footsoldiers, that can only be done by locals. ISIS would actually love US troops returning.

[kentonio]

Who is "they"? They didn't want to win it. Plain and simple.

The only way to win was to lose a huge number more Vietnamese and American lives. After the truth about how the war was being fought came out, the American people were not willing to tolerate more of that. If the path to victory is paved with hundreds of thousands of dead human bodies, then your rationale for the fight has to be really compelling.

[BlackCat]

Ken you need to improve your zen

http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/211463-Hi-I-m-RAH-and-I-m-a-Benaholic

[BlackCat]

JM'ed

[Ben Kenobi]

Fact is that ISIS can't be defeated by US/european footsoldiers

Yeah, sure. It could, at least at present. That's the point here. ISIS only came about after the withdrawal of American troops.

[Berzerker]

Christ. Obama promised to have the troops out. That's why he pulled them out in 2012. That's also why he refuses to authorize their return to fight ISIS.

Why is Obama relevant to what Bush did? He promised to honor a deal Bush negotiated with the Shia and now Repugs use it to blame him.

ISIS only came about after the withdrawal of American troops.

Their new name came about then, but they were fighting us for years before Obama inherited Bush's quagmire.

[kentonio]

Ken you need to improve your zen

http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/211463-Hi-I-m-RAH-and-I-m-a-Benaholic

This is true. Maybe tomorrow.

[Aeson]

No one wins wars, except for the arms manufacturers/dealers.

[Ben Kenobi]

Why is Obama relevant to what Bush did?

The fact that Bush didn't do it, and Obama withdrew the troops in 2012? Blame Bush all you want, but it gets tiresome after 7 years of Obama.

[Berzerker]

Get the fact outta here, you're blaming Obama for a deal Bush negotiated with Maliki

[Kidlicious]

Vietnam is not a democracy like South Korea and Japan. Could have been, such a waste of a war.

Are you a neo-con? We have allies who don't have a democracy. We don't invade them because of it. It's against our interests and it's a good way to lose wars.

[Ben Kenobi]

Are you a neo-con? We have allies who don't have a democracy. We don't invade them because of it. It's against our interests and it's a good way to lose wars.

Curious. I don't see how having democratic allies is contrary to American interests. And no, I'm not a neo con in that I believe that the US shouldn't be invading other countries - but - once America got involved they should have seen it through.

[kentonio]

And no, I'm not a neo con in that I believe that the US shouldn't be invading other countries - but - once America got involved they should have seen it through.

Because dragging out wars where you're bogged down in an endless cycle of guerilla warfare and reprisals is a great move for any country..

[korn469]

I have to agree. It all comes down to the goals that you set in going to war. The U.S. goal in Vietnam was to stop the spread of communism into South Vietnam. Total failure in doing that.

Same type argument can be made for the Soviets in Afghanistan.

PLATO, Kentonio, and C0ckney,

I am calling it a draw due to the Paris Peace Accords. The U.S. negotiated a withdrawal of it's forces and an end to hostilities; however, this came after the Easter Offensive, in which the ARVN battled the NVA to a standstill, and Operation Linebacker II, in which the U.S. launched heavy bombing raids against North Vietnam in December of 1972. Less than a month after this air offensive both sides signed the Peace Accords. I totally concede the U.S. desperately wanted to end the war, but so did the North. With Nixon's visit to China and U.S. Soviet efforts at detente, North Vietnam had reason to fear the loss of Soviet and Chinese support. The Tet Offensive and Easter Offensive proved the North couldn't defeat the South on the battlefield as long as the U.S. provided support to the South. Without Nixon because of Watergate, the South didn't have U.S. support in 1975 and less than two months after the invasion began, the North had overran Saigon. Similar support to the South in 1975 would probably produce similar results to the Easter Offensive instead of a quick victory. So if you strictly consider this a war between North Vietnam and the U.S. and it's allies, then the U.S. negotiated a settlement to the war. If both sides had of followed the settlement, it would have brought a peaceful conclusion to the war.

Now if you consider the Vietnam War as a war/proxy war between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. and P.R.C., then it was a loss. However, when viewed in that perspective it was a lost battle in the cold war, a war in which the U.S. ultimately prevailed.

[Ben Kenobi]

Similar support to the South in 1975 would probably produce similar results to the Easter Offensive instead of a quick victory. So if you strictly consider this a war between North Vietnam and the U.S. and it's allies, then the U.S. negotiated a settlement to the war. If both sides had of followed the settlement, it would have brought a peaceful conclusion to the war.

The historical reality is that the US abandoned South Vietnam to the wolves, tossing aside any value gained by all the American lives lost. Calling that a draw is fiction, given that this decision condemned South Vietnam to 40 years of communism.