Why couldn’t the U.S. win Vietnam was it because the Vietcong were masters of guerilla warfare or was it the hippies back home protesting and ranting about the war being a mistake?
>>18026712>Why couldn’t the U.S. win VietnamBecause shitmericans are cowards when they have to fight growth men instead of children
>>18026740>growth mensaaaaarrrrrrr
It's because we couldn't send the army up North to kill Ho Chi Mihn Saddam Hussein style. Liberals kept us pacified and only on the defensive because theh wanted communists to win.
>>18026712It's true that the Vietcong were good at guerilla warfare, but mostly it's simply that the Vietnamese people were willing to take an extraordinary amount of punishment. Two million Vietnamese died during that war, a war which dragged on for many years. Simply put, they are not pussies. Neither are Americans, but at the end of the day, Vietnamese were fighting to liberate their homeland and the Americans were not, so it was easier to just drop some bombs, rape some women, napalm some kids, go home and call it a day. In any case, it is another instance of Americans engaging in a kind of globalized tsujigiri, testing the blade against the flesh of the unarmored. I myself heard about improvements made to American military equipment as a result of this war.
>>18026750Iraq was weakened by the wars against Iran, with its air defenses completely destroyed, and yet it was invaded by 47 countries. The US military is a joke that only wins wars in Hollywood
>>18026750Ho Chi Minh was literally dying when the war happened, he was a very, very old man. Killing him would have done nothing but enrage the communists and made them fight harder. Anyway, there would have been a line of succession.
>>18026756>and yet it was invaded by 47 countries.That's an incredibly dramatic way of saying Poland sent an artillery battery to assist with Desert Storm
>>18026712The vietcong had gorillas? No wonder usa lost
>>18026712there was no clear way to achieve a long term goal of sustain South Vietnam, since not only was the government far to corrupt and inept to ever effectively govern itself and deal with its various issues, but North Vietnam was able to move fighters in and out of South Vietnam meaning it did not matter how much you ruined any force sent at you since they could always retreat, regroup, and rearm
>>18026712Pretty hard to win a war when you aren't allowed to go fight the enemy when they go out of bounds.
>>18026753>Vietnamese were fighting to liberate their homeland>Uh actually invading my neighbor is actually anti-imperialist because their being controlled by colonialist Chuds.
>>18026712The South Vietnamese government was inept and failed to provide good quality living conditions to its citizens causing them to side with the Communists.
>>18027537Vietnam was partitioned in 1954 but nobody expected that state of affairs to be permanent.
Juice ain't worth the squeeze, the Americans had the theoretical Capabilities to fully commit to victory for the Vietnam war, however Northern Vietnam was a small nation in Southeast Asia without any significant industry and an army which could only seriously endanger the other poor neighbour countries. Furthermore, invading North Vietnam could have also meant another conflict with China which was also not worth the effort.That's why Southern Vietnam was supposed to bear the brunt of the war and not the United States. However they were incapable of doing so despite some tactical successes. Noteably, the U.S. did more for South Vietnam than they or even the Soviet Union did for any other of their vassal states. That South Vietnam was not able to eventually fight by themselves is purely their own doing, the U.S. committed over 2 million Troops over the entire war and significantly weakened North Vietnam (to the Point the Vietcong ceased to be a relevant force after the Tet Offensive). South Vietnam only folded two years after the U.S. pulled out and North Vietnam broke the peace treaty which was supposed to end the conflict.
Viet Cong were totally destroyed by the US Army and ceased to have any real presence in the conflict after the Tet Offensive. Every attempt to actually attack the US failed. The Vietnamese won because of a lack of political will in Washington DC to continue the war or to escalate against the North out of fear that China would intervene like in Korea.
>>18026712The South Vietnamese army was demoralized and useless
>>18026756>47 countriesNo it was invaded by the US military, and 46 countries sent only a token show of support to say they were in the coalition. Desert storm was 99% American firepower, 99% American logistics, and 99% American personnel.
>>18026712Because the government and beaurocratic sectors stepped in. The Generals involved wanted to napalm all the crop fields and shut down all trade and movement of goods in the entire country, which certainly would have ended the war with a win but also effectively eradicated the Vietnamese as a people, which is how you fight a war. You kill your enemies, conquer what's left and extract their wealth and resources to pay for the tremendous expenditure.Korea and Vietnam were the beginning of the political/proxy wars of the modern day, where you have to act like third worlders are people and it matters whether or not they survive, and the result was predictable. Huge expenditure with no way to pay it off, high death toll with nothing to show for it. Next time, hopefully, we'll know better.
