Do you think we lost the Vietnam war?

Patrick D

Our mission was to at least keep South Vietnam capitalist and at most to get the communists out of all of Vietnam.
We failed to achieve either goal.
We lost the war.
The men who fought did so valiantly and their country owes them.
However, it was a war that didn't have anything to do with the US until the administration decided it wanted to go to war for quite stupid reasons.
The efforts were finally abandoned, which is good, because it wasn't worth another American life to keep the Vietnamese people from doing what they wanted to do.

Joshua H

Because at the end of the day, we left and the Communists took over South Vietnam.

October

The war was not about numbers. The war was about keeping the communist out of Viet Nam.The communist are now in charge of Viet Nam. We lost

NAZGUL

We did not lose it, Congress gave up on it and gave all those lives away by quiting.

Moose

What were the objectives of the war? What was the mission? What did we hope the outcome would be? Can you write the objectives down in bullet point form?

I can tell you what was NOT our mission/objective: to win the body count.

Yes, we lost.

But perhaps a better question is: Were we on the right side? Did the form or government we sacrificed 50,000 of our finest "fight" really need to be fought? Is Vietnam a bad country now? (No name calling, just facts.) If we knew how it would turn out, would we have invested our men and money?

ez91550

We won many battles,but we lost the war.

Time Will Tell

Considering the almost free markets they have today, I'd say we're winning the peace.

Too Old For Idol

"Only 50,000" is an insult statement to me and my brothers who served in the Vietnam War.

bob w

You, and from what I gather many others, must have a warped idea on death. Only 50,000... come now man have some respect. Numbers aside, when your talking about the deaths of human beings "only" shouldn't be used to describe the said amount.

I'm not sure if the 2 million dead Vietnamese represents enemy KIA, being NVA and VC, or if that includes civilians and the South Vietnamese as well. Which ever it is, what are you driving at? That we can pat ourselves on the back for killing so many soldiers from a 3rd world country?

Nobody won anything in that damn war, just millions dead and wounded and a lot of lost love on both sides. Communism can't even really claim a victory, just look at 'Nam today. I can book a flight to Saigon and pay a private tour guide to take me around battle sites, show me the countryside and let me play with some vintage 'Nam era weapons. Don't sound like Communism to me...

I spoke with my Father a few times about his time there before he died. He was drafted, an Infantryman, and while we didn't get into specifics much, I could see quite plainly a man who had lost a lot. He took back with him scars, some of which never went away. To this day I honor his duty, his courage by maintaining a healthy skepticism towards those who send our soldiers off to fight, and now I serve largely because of him, something he'd probably be mad it :p

In order to better honor those servicemen who gave everything even in the midst of national protest and doubt, perhaps you could ask why the involvement in Vietnam escalated to such a violent scale. You will find a much more meaningful answer to that question, one that can help you understand the state of things today too.

JMB

The number was in excess of 58,000.
We won the battles, but we lost the war.
Those people did not want help. President Eisenhower committed the US to bail out the French who had been stuck in the quagmire for years, all that changed was the Americans were losing their lives, and not the French.

EddyJ

Militarily we did not lose the war. We lost politically because we had politicians who were too chicken **** to let the military do what needed to be done to win.

scruffycat

We didn't end up helping them, because the government gave in to the national unrest and pulled out. Communist North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, murdering many South Vietnamese after the U.S. pullout. I was in high school in 1975 and met a Vietnamese girl who had barely escaped with her life and her dad's life. Her uncles had all been murdered. My grandparents lived in Saigon for many years (1940's and 50's), also, and most, if not all, of their Vietnamese friends were also murdered after the pullout.

Part of the problem, as I have heard it from friends who are Vietnam vets, is that that war was fought mostly from Washington and should have been fought from Vietnam where the soldiers were. The big decision- making was, unfortunately, left to those who were not actually there.

Or so I've heard it that way from vet friends.

bobbyrobby

Who is this "we" you speak of?

ndsube

First of all, your figures need a little adjusting. The casualty figures of the Vietnam war are:

Allies:
South Vietnam 220,000
USA 60,000 (58,000 KIA, 2000 MIA)
Others 7,000

Reds:
NVA and VietCong 1.1 million

In a war victory is not determined by the number of people killed. Example: in WWII USSR lost far more men than Germany. Who won?
In a war (particularly in a guerrilla war) number of casualties is less important than achieving goals.

In Vietnam war, Allies' goal was to stopping South Vietnam from falling to the Reds. Reds' goal was to unify Vietnam. When the war finally ended in 1975, there was no South Vietnam, and Vietnam was unified. So you can decide for yourself who won.

The reason why people bring up such arguments as :
"60,000 died from our side and we killed more than a million of them; so we won"
"We never lost a battle; So we won"
"Army never lost; Politicians and hippies betrayed the Army"
"Vietnam was a political defeat; But a military victory"

is that they do not understand the concept of People's War. A people's war is very different from a 18th Century European wars where armies faced each other in a field and fired volleys. In a people's war military action can not be separated from political actions. A people's army does not fight to win battles. It fights to win the war. The number of soldiers killed does not matter in a people's war, because the entire nation is an army.

A people's war is fought not only in the battle field. It is fought in the political field, and it is fought in the minds of the people. USA lost in all three fields in Vietnam.

In Vietnam, NVA and Vietcong fought a people's war.

Squee

I say that both side lost. When both sides lose that many lives, it wasn't worth it and what did it prove. That the us was trying to ploice the world as a whole?

Seccession Now!

The hippies lost the war. The soldiers fought valiantly.

Decland

The Vietnam war was lost.
America pulled out as soon as they discovered they were losing. When Australia pulled out, due to other reasons yet obviously losing being one, America's hope began to diminish.
So they pulled out.
Soldiers there died for no reasons as the "spreading communist threat" was a fear that was stupid. The soldiers were also conscripted(australia anyway)
Many familys and people were "lost". The war ended as North Vietnam gained control of the south.
So if people say america won, they are wrong as they were trying to stop the communist threat from the north of the 17th parallel.

EÅ¦IEÐ¸Ð¸E

we won

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: