The Truth about the Vietnam War | 5 Minute Video
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 5. 08. 2024
- Did the United States win or lose the Vietnam War? We are taught that it was a resounding loss for America, one that proves that intervening in the affairs of other nations is usually misguided. The truth is that our military won the war, but our politicians lost it. The Communists in North Vietnam actually signed a peace treaty, effectively surrendering. But the U.S. Congress didn't hold up its end of the bargain. In just five minutes, learn the truth about who really lost the Vietnam War.
đš PragerU is experiencing severe censorship on Big Tech platforms. Go to www.prageru.com/ to watch our videos free from censorship!
SUBSCRIBE đ www.prageru.com/join/
đČ Take PragerU videos with you everywhere you go. Download our free mobile app!
Download for Apple iOS ⥠itunes.apple.com/us/app/prage...
Download for Android ⥠play.google.com/store/apps/de...
đł Join PragerU's text list! optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
SHOP! đ Love PragerU? Visit our store today! shop.prageru.com/
Script:
Decades back, in late 1972, South Vietnam and the United States were winning the Vietnam War decisively by every conceivable measure. That's not just my view. That was the view of our enemy, the North Vietnamese government officials. Victory was apparent when President Nixon ordered the U.S. Air Force to bomb industrial and military targets in Hanoi, North Viet Nam's capital city, and in Haiphong, its major port city, and we would stop the bombing if the North Vietnamese would attend the Paris Peace Talks that they had left earlier. The North Vietnamese did go back to the Paris Peace talks, and we did stop the bombing as promised.
On January the 23rd, 1973, President Nixon gave a speech to the nation on primetime television announcing that the Paris Peace Accords had been initialed by the United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam, the Viet Cong, and the Accords would be signed on the 27th. What the United States and South Vietnam received in those accords was victory. At the White House, it was called "VV Day," "Victory in Vietnam Day."
The U.S. backed up that victory with a simple pledge within the Paris Peace Accords saying: should the South require any military hardware to defend itself against any North Vietnam aggression we would provide replacement aid to the South on a piece-by-piece, one-to-one replacement, meaning a bullet for a bullet; a helicopter for a helicopter, for all things lost -- replacement. The advance of communist tyranny had been halted by those accords.
Then it all came apart. And It happened this way: In August of the following year, 1974, President Nixon resigned his office as a result of what became known as "Watergate." Three months after his resignation came the November congressional elections and within them the Democrats won a landslide victory for the new Congress and many of the members used their new majority to de-fund the military aid the U.S. had promised, piece for piece, breaking the commitment that we made to the South Vietnamese in Paris to provide whatever military hardware the South Vietnamese needed in case of aggression from the North. Put simply and accurately, a majority of Democrats of the 94th Congress did not keep the word of the United States.
On April the 10th of 1975, President Gerald Ford appealed directly to those members of the congress in an evening Joint Session, televised to the nation. In that speech he literally begged the Congress to keep the word of the United States. But as President Ford delivered his speech, many of the members of the Congress walked out of the chamber. Many of them had an investment in America's failure in Vietnam. They had participated in demonstrations against the war for many years. They wouldn't give the aid.
For the complete script, visit www.prageru.com/videos/truth-...
I live and vlog in Vietnam right now. Fun fact : most vietnamese people I talk to love America
i love both
Im a Vietnamese and I love America
As an American who knew very little about the Vietnam War before watching this video, I was very surprised to read about anyone from that country loving the USA. Not knowing any better, I assumed they all hated us because so many of their own died in that war.
Thas is aweosme. Im glad to know that.
thanks mate
my grandpa was in the Vietnam war. It was so bad that he swore he would never talk about it after it was over. He died last year, and he kept his word to the grave.
My uncle & cousin were killed during the Vietnam War. Another Uncle's rescue helicopter was shot down (he broke his leg and his crew was rescued). They recieved a medal from the President LBJ. My uncle passed away 4 years ago from emphysema. He was a chain smoker. I'm proud of my Military Family. No they were not drafted. God bless you & your family on your loss. May your G-pa RIP.
Poor guy must of gone through it all while serving
@@user-gl7ek8md5j yea by the VietCong.
It was terrible. Our soldiers punish raped thousands of different villages young women and girls.
When US troops entered villages they were under policy orders to burn houses, crops, and to punish execute villagers (who were all considered viet kong)
Veterans have testified how rapings were widespread and people were often skinned alive as a warning to Vietnam villages. It was very widespread to cut off Vietnamese ears as tokens to trade for beer "ears for beers".
It wasn't those poor 17-19 year old boys fault. They were brainwashed at training and it was the norm at the time to treat Asians as non human. They never should have been sent there and the politicians in charge should never have lied up the whole scheme.
They were scared too.
You could only imagine the whole picture. It would've been terrible.
Those poor boys were all lied to.
@Kenyon Brown Did you just call the My Lai massacre a 'minor offense'?
"The military doesn't start wars, politicians start wars" - General William Westmoreland
Except the army of Imperialist Japan.
Accurate.
I mean we could simply condemn the Japanese for bombing Pearl harbour then leave then alone with conquering the world
Westmorland got a lot of American soldiers killed by a bad strategy General Abrams did that war the right way
Damn what stake in this game could a general possibly have?
History is about to repeat it self, but this time in Afghanistan. As soon the US troops leave that place the Taliban will return.
You are 100% correct! I have been telling this to people for years.
Holy shit, Nostradamus?
@Ryan Alex Too little too late
@@anonymousdontbotheraboutit2895 I canât stand people who worry about other countries more than America. No American life should be lost policing these third world countries. Poverty and high crime in America while we send Israel 146 billion dollars
@@anonymousdontbotheraboutit2895 spoken like a true patriot. I canât wait to have a fascist president
This is exactly as I remember it, all those years ago. I remember watching TV news about the very subject. This is why I am a Republican. I have never trusted a Democrat since that time.
+Christian Libertarian How you can be christian and libertarian at the same time is beyond me
+Jesus Christ Its the dichotomy of two opposing forces. Yin and Yang, sort of.
+Christian Libertarian
So what you're saying is it's an incoherent logical self-contradiction... And you don't think that that's inane.
+Mitchell Davis I'm saying that South Vietnam fell because Democrats cut their funding, after we promised to fund them.
+Alepap Believe it or not we had these things called newspapers and magazines back then. These were collections of paper where words were printed and pictures were placed. You may have to look this up on Google if you don't believe me. And they reported on the duplicity of Democrats at the time.
The typical liberal apologists for the North Vietnamese communists - who are, likewise, critics of the USA - will often play a kind of mind game: It goes like this: "If I admit 5% of error in the side that I support, I will win 100% of the high moral ground. With this 100% victory, I will declare my ideological enemy to be 100% in the wrong."
For anyone who thinks the North Vietnamese communists were such little darlings:
Upon the invasion of South Vietnam in 1975, the Vietnamese Communists, led by Le Duan, perpetrated a huge bloodbath in murdering hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese men, women, and children in cold blood. Up to 155,000 refugees fleeing the final NVA Spring Offensive were killed or abducted on the road to Tuy Hoa in 1975. Sources have estimated that 165,000 South Vietnamese died in the re-education camps out of 2.5 million sent, while the number executed could have been as high as 200,000 (Jacqueline Desbarats estimates an absolute minimum of 100,000 executions). Victims were beheaded, eviscerated or buried alive. Rummel estimates that slave labor in the "New Economic Zones" caused 50,000 deaths (out of a total 1 million deported). The number of boat people who died is estimated between 200,000 and 400,000, out of the 2.5 million that fled (according to the UN). There were also tens of thousands of suicides after the North Vietnamese take-over.
And yet liberals will continue to bleat their statistics and cite the My Lai massacre (ONE massacre by a rogue platoon, condemned and abhorred by every decent American citizen)... they will continue to make their movies (turning the ONE My Lai massacre into a generalised slur against the integrity and honour of the American soldier... they will continue to twist history, declaring the "winners write history" (when in truth it is they, the liberal losers, who are writing it and teaching it and declaring it as truth)... and on and on the liberals lie.
The real TRUTH is that every time a liberal lies about the North Vietnamese communists, they perpetuate the erosion of America. Which is exactly what they, in Truth, want.
ooraseal1 You know what I hear when you talk...? Blah, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason, blah, blah, cowardice, perfidy, moral weakness, treason,
ooraseal1 Then it's good that I disagree with you... otherwise we'd both be wrong.
"ONE massacre by a rogue platoon, condemned and abhorred by every decent American citizen"
Heh. No, there were plenty of others, and no the guy who stopped it sacrificed his career and the actual murderers got a slap on the wrist - The worst, Calley, served 3 years under house arrest - for killing 22 (probably more) innocent people. There was tacit acceptance, pretend there isn't if you wish.
But the real point you make yourself - the NV communists were so bad because they killed so many innocent people - let's suppose they were even worse than you claim - We still killed more. And we sent tens of thousands of young men to their deaths.
And for what? You tell me how it was anywhere near worth it. Those who suggest there isn't a lesson for us from Vietnam do more to "erode" America than any bleeding heart.
Are you saying that the Vietnamese communists being cruel to their people was the reason the US went to war? So they just felt sorry for them and sent in the troops? Bullshit. The war was pointless, every reason for entering the war was false. The reason we were told was the ridiculous "domino effect"story, which never happened, and never was going to happen. There was simply no justification, history since then has shown it to be completely pointless.
Aden Wachtel
Sorry buddy- it did happen. Ever heard of the communist Kmer Rouge in Cambodia ? How about the communist fronts in Laos or in Thailand ? Ever wonder why the Soviets just sorta left those pro-communist efforts to their own ? Research will show you the Soviets wanted Viet Nam for it's strategic location- it gave them claim to a major part of the Pacific that the other countries didn't. Tell the 2 million skulls that make up the walls in Cambodia there was no "Domino effect" ! Tell the millions of Vietnamese that Senators Carey and Kennedy betrayed that they imagined it all ! Heck- you probably voted for the "Great Betrayer" Senator JF Carey - may his name be blotted out of existance !
I was on a few ship in the Western Pacific in 1977-1979 and we rescued many So. VN boat people. CWO4 (Cryptology), USN, Ret, 73-95.
Thank you so much, you are a hero đ
Yes, cause a war that kills millions, save a few thousand, then everything becomes OK.
@@vegitoblue5000 What about all the people the communist killed? nothing? Is it because they are communists and we just expect that from them?
The VC killed 5000 civilians in the lead up to the Tet Offensive.
So were u in the war? My grandpa was in the war. Heâs still alive
@@cyclone8974 and the Hue Massacre
It's Amazing how the U.S. College students can be used as a political tool. Still happening today.
And college students are even dumber today than they were back then.
@@philkearny5587 Statistically they're better in every subject
Flash forward 45 years . This mess we are in now . Nothing has changed. ??? Got another president thrown out of office . 20 year wars. Only to be taken over by aggressive opponents . Riots ,race baiting ,Communism. We are all stupid for falling for any of these traps .
im brazilian and when i took Vietnam War at school, they taught me that the US failed miserably because the US army was not ready for a guerrilla war with primitive traps lol
Itâs even more amazing that people think PragerU is anything but a political tool. Theyâre literally bought and paid for by right-wing war-mongering losers
We still napalmed unarmed villages.
+Steven Reynolds Not you americans, but the US army do it. To blame citzens for the acts of its national's army is agree with fascist and cheap nationalists discourse. Its a dangerous way to observe the History.
No...no we didn't lol. villages you see getting Napalm ate "Free fire zones" means the Government moved the people out of the village. their for anything in those zones after it was cleared out was deemed hostile.
this was a French Strategy that worked in North Africa. a war which France had won but then the French government betrayed them
+Steven Reynolds America did that in Japan too.
+Sagisaka Touko And Japan did that in China
+Matthew Leitch And China did that to themselves.
*âYou canât lose the war if you quit itâ*
-USA
;,D
Hello motherland
When u quit, u automatically loose
Western spy
Haha correct
Another truth about Vietnam:
"Charlie don't surf!" --Lt.Col. Kilgore
I keep finding more and more frequently how many lies my teachers have taught me at my schools
â@@benmarkerson1645 Why does it matter?
@@benmarkerson1645 I'm American
@@yanastanimirova8786 Does twisting history to fit an assigned narrative not matter? It is wholly destructive, slimy, and evil to indoctrinate people, especially the youth who cannot yet fully reason with themselves. That is not just, and should be an American issue or value, but the world's as well. History is not merely an assortment of facts, but represent the fabric and being of the culture and identity of the nation, and if beguiled in a way that sways one side or the other is untrue firstly, but disgusting, and defaces and vandalizes the story of our and our fellow American's ancestors. That should be held up in high regard in both, and in all political parties, and society as a whole, but sadly, that is not the case.
@@peterloken872 Yes, those who do not learn from history and understand it at a core level will repeat it. Humanity continues to embody a bloody path that leads to destruction. Some of us turn to hate, manipulation and war, time and time again as a means to exterminate whatever we see as a bother or a threat. The opposing side finds only fear and bloodshed while dreaming of retaliation, ensuring their own demise. Then this thirst for revenge is translated into violence against others, even innocents and thus, the cycle goes on.
The biggest lie is God is not real and Satan also.
Why this video has so many thumbs down? Does it contain false information?
I didn't know much about the subject but I felt this video was really biased, so I checked the wikipedia article and, although the guy said nothing wrong, it seems that he told only 10-20% the story, and of course he only talked about the part concerning directly the democrat party :/
So since it doesn't seem to depict fairely what happens, this might explain the thumbs down
+Louis de Gasté you're using Wikipedia as a source?
The information isn't false, it's just woefully incomplete.
1) The U.S. had achieved our main strategic objective (stopping the domino effect) in 1967-1968 with counterinsurgency operations in Thailand. (There's a possibly legitimate argument that the domino effect was B.S., but the belief in it was the main reason for intervening, so true or not, it was important.)
2) The South Vietnamese never developed their own political institutions or economy. It's hard to support a country when there's nothing there to support. (To illustrate how bad it was: There was a point where a SV congressman/general made the mistake of not showing up to an important meeting, so they made him president as punishment. LOL.)
3) The conservatives in congress kept making promises even after it became clear the American people were not willing to support Vietnam because of my first two points.
To me it seems the value of fighting the war was dropping while the people we were supporting were demanding more U.S. aid and doing less themselves. It became a farce.
IMO though, we won the Vietnam war. We achieved our strategic objectives. Sure we did it by abandoning our allies which doesn't make me proud, but we got ours.
Understanding this complicated war is critical to understanding the limits of power in a free society. It's worth studying.
Yes: I use wikipedia as a source until I find a more reliable source of information. This video seems to be biased against the democrats (wether or not it is right in what it says), while the wikipedia article gives a list of contributing factors without any direct accusation toward a group of people. So out of those 2 sources of information i have, i judge wikipedia to be the most reliable.
Louis de Gasté
While I love Wikipedia as a secondary source of information, it is overly careful to avoid value judgements. (For good reason.)
Yet policies have to be implemented. Judgements must be made. Understanding why mistakes were made doesn't absolve those mistakes or those making them.
Ideally we learn from our mistakes and avoid making them again. Finger should be pointed in opinion areas like CZcams.
While Republicans seriously misjudged America's commitment to the war, As Robert Kennedy pointed out shortly before his assassination, many Democrats were cowards. There really isn't any other word for it.
Still, policy makers should have taken the Baby Boomers moral weakness into account. The idea that democracies can survive decades long wars is obviously flawed.
We are still dealing with these issues today. Policy makers are making insane commitments to the War on Terror, commitments that obviously can't be paid. (They did avoid the draft, allowing the cowards in our society a way to ignore the problems for a while.) War is not the natural state of democracy.
Why did we go to Vietnam in the first place. Whats the "Truth" about that?
Stop communism ._.
It's not the 70s/80s any more. You shouldn't make yourself look stupid online
yakikadafi
me?
We went to war in Vietnam to stop the invading communist North Vietnam from taking over all of Vietnam
BLUNTESTBOOT233 yes, asking why we went to vietnam in the first place is a stupid question
The United States could have kept fighting for the next ten years after 1973 but as in Afghanistan the result would have been the same. It was a waste of the blood and treasure of a great nation.
I had watched documentaries on the ' Vietnam conflict' and on the rise, then subsequent decline of US Military support. I had been frustrated with the inconsistencies in US policy and lack of follow through. Now I finally understand why. And I thought only the current (2018) Congress was nearly bankrupt of sound principle.
czcams.com/video/FaLwFvhWdZE/video.html
It's been that way for 40 years . Only one thing will change it kick them all out and start over.
@@douglasmccrary2345 40 yrs?? Try more like 75 yrs! We gave Eastern Europe to the rotten Reds, then that little weasel, Truman, gave N. Korea to the Reds, did nothing for China when Mao was sweeping up after having "allowed" Chiang to absorb the main brunt of Japanese attacks, & gave full U.S. support to that little rogue of the Middle East, Israel. We have no leadership. Ike was the best we had, although Carter was the finest gentleman in the league. JFK was a two-faced weakling, LBJ was an animal, Nixon sold us out to Red China, etc etc ad nauseam. We need an altogether different Executive branch. I say three, one administrator, one military, one expert in jurisprudence. The idea was offered at the Constitutional College or Convention, whatever you want to call it, for six presidents, so I'm not off my mark.
Congress is made up of politicians who are there to make sure they can stay there, no matter what.
Thatâs why Trump, a non-politician, is such a threat to them.
@@stevenbrenner2862 Remember the Time when the National Congress was Made of seasoned Military officers?
Hello American people ,i am an Vietnamese and i wanna say Don't mind visit us we are friends not enemies
The Peace is real if you accept it :3
This was talk by an 10 years old girl
Thank you
China is the true threat.
Peace
@@TheMrPeteChannel We should let the Vietnamese handle it.
@@cyclone8974 Possibly.
Sorry but this video completely flys in the face of fact from the beginning, we were not decisively winning anywhere in Vietnam, every advance was met with stronger North Vietnamese guerrilla warfare because of better knowledge of the land and using the diplomatic shelter of neighboring nations. We didn't belong there in the first place and no matter why or when we left the North would have dominated the south as soon as we did leave.
***** To the common misconception that the U.S. never lost a major battle in Vietnam I have 10 responses and more if you like;
Attack on Camp Holloway, Battle of Dong Xoai, Attack on Da Nang Airbase, Iron Hand Air Strikes, Battle for LZ Albany, Attack on Marble Mountain, Battle of Xa Cam My, Operation Paul Revere IV, Battle of Cu Nghi, Battle of Ho Bo Woods.
This entire source is created to back every Conservative decision with an astoundingly obvious bias, I'm a libertarian so I can agree with some of their videos but even those videos I find too bias to find useful for sharing with anyone else. But wars aren't won by kill count it is won by land occupied and we were never able to march into North Korea like we did in Afghanistan (not that I support that decision) and take over, the Viet Cong attacked at night under the shelter of darkness to gain the advantage and we lost 58,000 for what? To treat Vietnam as a playground for the borderline paranoia about communism vs democracy? That's why support for the war plummeted, not because we were losing, because it was a stalemate in vain. And trust me, I've done my fair share of research on U.S. foreign policy and guess what my favorite example for why the U.S. ought to return to non-interventionists? Vietnam.
***** A communist libertarian lol, that would be quiet a site, but no I'm not a follower of any brand of Marxist ideology. And every single one of those battles resulted in at least 100 deaths/WIB individually, that is not small scale, and most of them well exceed that.
+Kolton Whitmire and Operation Linebacker 2 too
+Christian McDaniel stupid madness, we lost Operation Linebacker 2
matchesburn A decisive victory is the U.S. marching into Baghdad after three months, a TWENTY YEAR INVOLVEMENT in a country most Americans hadn't even heard of at the time is not a victory. The American population was tired of being told "we're almost to victory" or "Peace is at hand", and no matter when we decided to end our involvement in that war people like you would have existed looking back and saying "we should've stayed for another year and it would've all been over".
Sure, sure, the US won the Vietnam war...
They simply forgot to inform the enemy that they won and... left..
They won lmao but another war started if you wanna get technical so Vietnam 2 USA won Vietnam war 1 but lost the second war
Oh STFU
But ... we informed the enemies. The dead Vietnamese soldiers know best who won the war.And there were 3 times more than American casualties (let them rest in peace) in each battle.
@@daniellap.stewart6839 damn baby calm down
American Patriot what? There were literally 58,000-59,000 American casualties to the North Vietnameseâs 1.1 million. Plus we won every battle that major or not we won
As a veteran, historian and someone who has visited Vietnam many times recently I found this PragerU video to be very misleading, biased, omitting key facts, and just plain shoddy history. America's defeat in Vietnam is a historical fact. Blame it on what ever you wish, but America failed in it's mission and began leaving long before it actually ended. The enemy eventually took over and won a military and political victory. You can spin the story however you wish but that's a defeat by any definition. If you need physical proof you have to go there. There are communist and North Vietnamese flags (now adopted as the Vietnamese national flag) flying everywhere. After 50 years and so much information now declassified and published including the Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara's study now called the Pentagon Papers, it's amazing that PragerU and Bruce Herschensohn would still be pitching the same old debunked and worn out Vietnam War history spins from decades ago. Herschensohn's argument can be easily dismantled with the truth, point by point, by anyone with a little research and study. Shame on you PragerU.
millercenter.org/the-presidency/secret-white-house-tapes
This video is pointing a finger at the democratic congress for why things went the way they did. Am not American nor Vietnamese. My point is what is your argument really educate us with the truth
You're post is complete BS.
Many athletes are quick to compare their sport to war. Football is a good example. So let's take a look at how this analogy compares.
A sport has a starting whistle and an ending whistle.
For the US involvement in Vietnam, the starting whistle was the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which Authorized the Use of Military Force to defend
South Vietnam from invasion by North Vietnam.
For the US involvement in Vietnam, the end whistle (like all wars) is when the peace treaty is signed. For the US this was on 27 January 1973. The US,
South Vietnam and North Vietnam all signed the Paris Peace Accords.
The lead negotiators for the
US and North Vietnam were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.
After the 1968 Tet Offensive, the Viet Cong in the South had been crushed. Tet was intended to be a popular uprising, inspiring the People to rise up against their corrupt government.
This did not happen. Instead, the VC were hunted down and eliminated. For the next two years, the insurgency was targeted and eliminated. By 1970, all of the population centers of the South were in the control
of the South Vietnamese government, villages were protected by the RUF/PUF, and there was very little danger travelling even in the country- side.
The insurgency had been defeated. There
was no question. Every metric supported it.
In 1972, North Vietnam attempted to seize the south via the "Easter Offensive." This was after all major US ground units had re-deployed from the country. Vietnamization had taken over as the primary policy and the ARVN was on their own on the ground.
They were, however, supported by US
air and naval gun fires. The North Vietnamese invasion was stopped in its tracks.
They were beaten so badly they had no choice but to withdrawal and to sue for peace.
It would be THREE years, during which time they were not being bombed by the US, before they would be able to mount another attack.
The North Vietnamese had agreed to some of the principles in 1972 but as the formal signing approached, they balked. The North Vietnamese position had always been that the South Vietnamese government was illegitimate and that South Vietnam as a country had no right to exist.
So they refused to go to Paris to sign the final accords. The US launched LINEBACKER 11 in December of 1972.
Within weeks, the North Vietnamese not
only agreed to return to Paris but they completely backed off their demands. They formally recognized the South Vietnamese government.
They acknowledge the South Vietnamese state's right to exist. They agreed to halt all military actions in and against the South and they agreed to allow the South Vietnamese people to choose
their own future.
All of these were demands they
were compelled to agree to. They had no ability to force their own demands on the US or South Vietnam. Their insurgency had been crushed.
Their conventional invasion had been halted. There was nothing more for them to do.
So on 27 JAN 1973, the war ended. Which means, the draft also ended. Which means Congress was no longer funding a war in South Vietnam. That's how wars work.
Once you sign the peace treaty, all
the money and resources committed to the war are by definition ended. So the US withdrew its military force with the understanding that North Vietnam was not going to attack South Vietnam.
The international community emplaced a four nation observation element to ensure North Vietnam did not attempt to invade South Vietnam. (Canada was one of those four nations and within a year quit because they were reporting North Vietnam's violations of the treaty and the
international community refused to enforce the peace agreement.)
In December 1 974, North Vietnam launched a "third" Indochina war, invading South Vietnam. In violation oftheir formally recognized peace agreement. Without any implications from the international community.
There were NO US military forces in South
Vietnam. There were no air strikes. There was no naval gunfire. The US war with North Vietnam ended on 27 JAN 1973. They were no longer belligerents. The US was not fighting in this war.
So how did the US lose a war it was not party to?
it is the equivalent of saying France lost to Israel in the 6 Day War since it had at one time been involved in that region.
The South Vietnamese absolutely lost their war with North Vietnam. The US was not a party to that war. The war the US fought ended with a peace treaty in which the North Vietnamese gave into US
demands.
In which the US had achieved its
objective and in which the North Vietnamese did not.
In our sports analogy, the final whistle blew. The points on the score board showed the US had won the game. The US players went to the locker room. They changed into their street clothes. They drove home.
The North Vietnamese waited until they
were gone and then started scoring goals again. Except the game was already over.
In February 2016, the Denver Broncos won the Super Bowl. This does not change the fact that the Pittsburgh Steelers beat the Broncos on December 20th. The Broncos ultimately went on to beat the Panthers to be the Super Bowl champions but on
the Steelers win/loss chart, it shows a win against the Broncos.
North Vietnam ultimately achieved their
objectives. They defeated South Vietnam and re- unified their country by force (in a blatant violation of an internationally recoanized peace treaty). They still did not defeat the US.
This isn't a matter of semantics. This isn't "moving goal posts." The US was not at war with North Vietnam in 1975. They had signed a peace treaty which was entirely in the US's favor.
The war was over and the US won. The1975 war was separate from the US's involvement from 1963 to 1973.
Nick Dial,
Football is a stupid analogy for war, no matter what the athletes say. Any combat Vet will tell you that.
Football teams try to gain yards.
Enemy soldiers kill each other.
Football teams stop at the end of each play and relax until the next play.
Soldiers never relax, they kill each other.
Play stops anytime the Ref blows his whistle.
In war, there is no Ref, there is no whistle, the âplayersâ donât stop. They kill each other.
Football players sometimes get injured and leave the game. They are attended to by a team of doctors, therapists, technologists, et al. dedicated to their individual recovery and rehabilitation.
Soldiers sometimes get injured and leave the war. If they are lucky, they will be attended to by an inadequate VA system staffed with overworked doctors, therapists, technologists, et al. If they are not lucky, they will leave the war in a body bag. The ultimate PTSD.
Bottom line: Football is a GAME! A stupid GAME, you numbskull! War is literally kill or be killed. Itâs not a game, itâs DEATH!
P.S.
Sorry that I lost my cool at the end, but... I am a Vietnam Vet. Not a combat Vet, but I know some. My reaction was based on the little I know about what they went through. For those reasons, the football GAME analogy is insulting.
@@nickdial8528 I hate to burst your bubble because I know it's painful. Have you ever been to Vietnam? I have and there is no such country as "South Vietnam" anymore. You can go and see if you don't believe me. Why? Because America was prevented from achieving it's objectives both politically and militarily in Vietnam. America was unable to sustain it's support or promise of military might (bombing) if the enemy violated the peace agreement. South Vietnam fell with the last American military and diplomatic personnel barely able to get out fast enough. America and the American people had lost their will to fight any longer. America lost South Vietnam in spite of everything it could do. That is a defeat by any definition. Sorry to break the news to you.
I Travelled to Vietnam this year (specifically Ho Chi Minh City) and it's impressive to learn what their Official side of the story is...
Completely different from the one the US told us.
It makes you wonder...
+c0c0456 I'm surfing the Internet and it's impressive to learn the other side of the story too. Definitely makes me wonder...
+c0c0456 Hello, which year did you travel to VN?
From my observations, this clip's content is objective. It doesn't make any biased conclusions.
On the other hand, the Communist party are mostly biased.
p/s: I was born in north Vietnam, especially in a Communist province, where Ho Chi Minh was born, experiencing the mind-washing education of the Communist Party.
From being a global citizen, I'm neither for nor against specific countries. Rather, I would be for or against countries' actions. So the definition of traitor shouldn't be applied here. Countries sometimes commit good actions, sometimes bad actions. For example, I consider American bombing in Hanoi in 1972 evil. My philosophy is simple, I would like to find out what is truth. The truth is not dependent on governments or organizations.
Bro, before writing sth to reply my comment, plz think about this question first:
What if you were born in Western countries? Then what another version of you will do seeing my previous comment?
+c0c0456 vietnam won. that's all
Clint E.
Actually it depends on the areas you visit. There were many that strongly support the communist party. It's even extreme to the extent that if you publicly show your disrespect for communist party, or socialist ideology, then you will be mark as "traitor" by civilians (VNESE: PháșŁn Äá»ng). And then you will have to work with policeman...
I think the fact that you were welcome everywhere is because of VNese's tradition that we usually don't hold grudges towards everyone against their past action. Japanese, French are also welcome. VNese tend to only cautious of Chinese - a dangerous neighbour for thousands of year.
Growing up as a Vietnamese Boy for more than 18 years, this is the first time I have ever heard this. Whether it is truth or not, it is heartbreaking!
It isnât truth. Prager U is a political think tank that ALWAYS bends or stretches the truth. They forgot to mention that we invaded to appease our military industrial complex.
@@uncleho1945 You mean 1989 tank ?
its the truth. A decisive victory by all means for the US and South VN. However, the North VN government didn't follow the agreement to ceasefire when they knew that the US were pulling out.
@@saladbetch8235 If it was a decisive victory then the war would have ended in 1973 not 1975 and Vietnam would continue to be divided, what the Americans did was more like an honorable retreat than a " decisive victoryâ. âRemember, the purpose of the North Vietnamese, besides reunification, they had to find a way to force the Americans to withdraw from the war.
What was you taught? America always tells lies.
As a Vietnamese American, I love the country and the people. That doesn't mean I like the government. However, Vietnamese people have a big heart willing to forgive and give a second chance even you did stabbed us in the back. Vietnam is a war country for thousands of years and we live by the code of honor and dignity.
So basically you don't like the government who is trying to develop the country day by day.Right?Mr 3 que?
We Chinese already learned bloody lessons from Vietnamese, lol
@@aofeizhang8735 apparently not, as China invaded Vietnam soon after the Americans left because they werenât willing to be a Chinese puppet state lol
I wish you would understand that the Democratic party, not the whole US, stabbed South Vietnam in the back, and they also stabbed the US military and our own dead soldiers in the back.
well USA never fought against vietnam country was divided so they intervened to try and protect south vietnam
I canât believe people are actually defending Vietnam. Why should our brave men and women go to war to protect the ego of oligarchs and bureaucrats? Make love not war brothers and sistersđ€đ»
Why they should?
Well basically because they literally started the whole issue. And then promised to keep those hundreds of thousands of people safe.
Itâs called keeping your word and having integrity as a country.
Once they did what you wrote, well everything went to đ© and tons upon tons of people died.
But who cares âmake loveâ
@Lukas Lombardo huh? Once the USA stabilized the situation and essentially âendedâ the war nobody was dying anymore.
Then they just broke their promises and got up and left. Guess how many died then? Directly because of the usa saying âpfff yeah, weâre outta here. Dont care anymoreâ
I have been living in Vietnam for the last two years. I love living in Saigon. I have been all over South Vietnam on a motorbike. The Vietnamese people are very kind. Yes they love Americans.
Have they changed the name back to Sigon from Ho Chi Minh City?
@@NamVet68SigBn523 No. It is Ho Chi Minh City and forever will be Ho Chi Minh City.
@@rustinusti The natives still call it Sigon.
@@NamVet68SigBn523 You asked if they changed the name back to Saigon, and I told you no. The majority of Vietnamese will also tell you no.
@@NamVet68SigBn523 The natives of Transnistria still call themselves a Soviet republic. You mean to tell me the Soviet Union is still a country?
Hahahahahahahahaha! What a joke! The US "won" the Vietnam War the same way they "won" the Korean War! It was a stalemate in Korea in 1953 and a stalemate in Vietnam in 1973. But the war continued because the US did not defeat the North into surrendering! Just like the USSR LOST in Afghanistan in 1992, the US LOST in Vietnam in 1975!
not true
wont
Oh? Where im i wrong?
Jesse Ramirez not sure forget my retarded comment
wont
ohhh ok
They did win the Korean War though, they stopped the death tyranny of millions of people. They successfully stopped an invasion, they did not attack. Stopping Death is winning.
By 1973 the majority of the 58,000 American soldiers and Marines who died in the War had been lost. Too little, too late. The US had no need to get involved in Vietnam. A tragic waste of brave young American lives.
Super Bad no,they are not democratic
We had no right to invade or war against Vietnam.
Based
Stories are always different on each sides.
+PassbyU The only rational comment I've read on the comment board.
I know this side this story to be true everytime I see my father cry on April 4th. I saw his bitterness and his shame.
+PassbyU I mean really, you just need to read into Ho Chi Minh's own writings.
He was appalled that France would fight to hold its colony, he considered the French Republic's motto as an ideal to be achieved "Equality, Fratenity, Liberty".
It is rather sad that it came to conflict.
+Wasp yes there is
+Wasp By that logic , do you still believe in Santa claus? The children do after all have their side of that issue.
Super weary of Videos that start with "The truth about"
+David Harford The truth always seems so simple for then. I learned at school to distrust people who always have a little answer for everything
+David Harford Because they are all far from the truth and just want viewers. Ford, Nixon and Bush are responsible for thousands upon thousands of terrified young American men who where forced to sign up for the draft when they turned 18 yrs old and die in a country far from home and thousands came home with terrible injuries. Now we have another Bush running for president of the USA, unbelievable but true. If he wins he will probably send thousands of young men to be killed fighting ISIS. When these cowards force this on young Americans they should be forced by law to lead, thats right, right up front, lead them into battle.
Helen Jackman How about this:
If any politician wants to start a war they MUST send all of their children to fight in that war on the front lines.
That would probably stop all wars america starts.
+David Harford That would be a not a good idea, why would you punish poor children because of their fathers?
David Harford The irony being that a higher percentage of congressmen's sons fought in Vietnam than did as a percentage of the general population.
So basically we should've never entered the war gotcha
Some people seem to be puzzled, or bemused, or scornful, or derisive, or upset, or hateful, ... that socialist Vietnam adopts the market economy even with much capitalistic flavor. They fail to understand the following
# For the Vietnamese
Uncompromised priority: Independence and Integrity of their Country
Other goals and priorities
Priority #1: Freedom and Democracy
Priority #2: Happiness
Priority #3: Security
Priority #4: Peace
Priority #5: Prosperity
Priority #6: International Standing
# The rest, whether it's Monarchy, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, a Mixture of those, ... could easily be negotiable to serve those above goals.
# Thus, the Vietnamese had endured unbelievable sacrifice and hardship in their long wars against capitalist French colonialists, and fascist Japanese militarists, and capitalist American neo-colonialists, and communist Chinese expansionists, not because of socialism or capitalism or communism, but because of their country's Independence and Integrity.
================
Putting it simply, the Vietnamese just wanted their country's independence and integrity, and to be left alone, IF NOT FRIEND TO EVERYONE. ALL ELSE IS NEGOTIABLE.
# They'd go to any length, endure any sacrifice, hardship, suffering, ... for their country's independence and integrity.
@Jerry Springer -- Jerry Springer says "If the USA wanted to take Vietnam it could have done so in a few days. ..." -- I say:
# After having caused unspeakable destruction and damage, untold deaths and injuries of both Vietnamese and Americans resulting in infinite misery and heartbreak for their families, the US Government had finally exhausted all it could do in its war in Vietnam.
# Nearly 700 thousand troops (including South Koreans and Australians) - More troops ?
# 9 million military personnel served on active duty during the Vietnam era from August 1964 to May 1975 (www.uswings.com/ ) - More young Americans ?
# Between 1965 and 1975, the United States and its allies dropped more than 7.5 million tons of bombs on Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia - double the amount dropped on Europe and Asia during World War II. Pound for pound, it remains the largest aerial bombardment in human history (storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/2eae918ca40a4bd7a55390bba4735cdb ) - More bombs ?
# 17% of the US strategic stock of B52 bombers (34 aircraft) shot down during the US' supreme effort at "bombing them [Vietnam] back to the stone age" during the Christmas-1972's 12 days of bombing. More B52 shot down and the US strategic reserve is gone; Associated Press [AP] wrote "At this rate (of being shot down) all US B52s would be extinct in 3 months", then the US would be extremely prone to its enemies' attacks, and the US had no strategic means to respond - More B52 strategic bombers to be shot down ?
# More massacres of My Lai, Thanh Phong, ...., more "Napalm Girl", more Dioxin-caused deformed babies (czcams.com/video/vybg5NHnT8E/video.html ) ? - More barbarities ?
# More US-society breakdown ? More Kent State killings ?
# Etc.
@Jerry Springer The US cant even destroy one country it can't destroy the world.
@Jerry Springer Deluded clown. You can't even bring proof so you resort to insulting me over my country.
@Jerry Springer You are scared of mexican for no reason it's funny.
.....something's wrong here. i've have talked to numerous people who fought in vietnam and served in vietnam. everyone describes it as a disaster. we would go in take a spot leave and then they we would retake the same location.. look the congress stuff and it's effect on south vietnam that sound legit but what about the winter soldier report? and didn't congress want to back out because of the amount of americans we were losing.
Yeah, but who are you going to believe, eyewitnesses or some guy on the internet??? Come on, man!
Yeah; Ford was not highly regarded either because he pardoned Nixon. It might've been the right thing to do, but it didn't do much for his popularity.
As for believing shit off the internet, I still catch myself doing it ALL THE DAMN TIME.
Glorified Truth yeah its hard. i find myself rejecting alot of shit. just because it feels biased.
problem is. walking into a topic your own bias makes you want to believe something or NOT believe it. makeing everything subjective.
AaronArcLOL in most respects, the war was fougjt from D.C., and not the way it should have been fought. I highly reccomend the book "About Face" by Col. David Hackworth.
Slomofogo aside from the democratic relations with china thing. .....WTF NIXON~! EVERYTHING WITH THIS GUY! EVERY THING!!!!
I love how the comments are in no way reflective of the like/dislike bar.
He missed the gulf of Tonkin false flag part.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident happened just not as severe as reported.
The only war in history in which success was based solely upon body count rather than territory gained, aka random hills in the middle of jungle where fellow Americans were facing dreadful odds of attacking an entrenched force at an elevated position. It must have been absolutely horrific.
The strategy of fighting over hills was that it was better to pursue the enemy than let them congregate in or around urban areas, where artillery & air support could only be used reservedly.
Now think about how horrific it must have been for innocent civilians who were wrongly bombed at fired at.
No, it was not decided by body count . 70% of the "body count" were most probably civilians. The war was won when the south was liberated from imperialist subjugation
@@hochigaming14yearsago90 Nani?!
@@fullsendcirca9255 ?????!??!??!??!?!??!???
But killing people did not lead to sucess so what are you saying ?
regardless, we should never have been there in the first place
***** as in allies?
+dude sweet yea, because there is no oil
Thales Silva But is that a rational hatred.. to hate communism.
+Thales Silva Neither is napalm or 3 million dead civilians.
Das Haifisch still better than 30 million dead civilians
My country's history is a bloodbath. I would do anything to stop anyone who try to break the peace again
Communism party, please
Nope read history books clearly and CLEARLY it was invaded for over its ENTIRE HISTORY so of course its a blood bath!
+Pootis Man well china did like invade us for like thousand of decade... no wonder it's a blood bath
hairbuster ribert and your point is, still a bloodbath?
Frankly, as a Vietnamese, I really don't care who won or who lost that war. But I do care whether Vietnam would get back her independence and integrity, and whether armed foreign invaders were still present on our homeland, dictating via a puppet régime what we could and could not do.
A foreign regime does control your country, - China and Russia. Communism has always had a globalist agenda from its beginnings. That was why we were at war with it. The founders of this doctrine was a "Medigan," as you like to call us. His name was Karl Marx.
"I don't care what becomes of Russia. To hell with it. All this is only the road to a World Revolution." -
Vladimir Lenin
"It was the Russians that introduced the Chinese to Marxism. Before the October Revolution, the Chinese were not only ignorant of Lenin and Stalin but did not even know of Marx or Engels. The salvos of the October Revolution awoke us to Marxism-Leninism."
Mao Zedong
The Vietnam war was a continuation of the war for independence, which stopped in 1954,but was not unfinished .This time the invader was US ,instead of France .Finally the US were defeated too.
-Said by a Viet Cong
If you don't read Vietnamese, maybe the English interpretation below helps.
# Vietnamese saying: Giáș·c Äáșżn nhĂ , ÄĂ n bĂ cĆ©ng ÄĂĄnh! English: Enemy arriving to your home; women too fight!
# To better understand Vietnamese women, look up for "TrÆ°ng sisters", "Lady Triá»u (Triá»u Thá» Trinh)", âVĂ” Thá» SĂĄuâ, âNguyá» n Thá» Minh Khaiâ, âLĂȘ Thá» Há»ng Gáș„mâ, âÄáș·ng ThĂčy TrĂąmâ, âNguyá» n Thá» Ăt (Ăt Tá»ch)â, "TáșĄ Thá» Kiá»u", "Nguyá» n Thá» Äá»nh", "BĂči Thá» XuĂąn", ...
# Poem by TỠHữu:
O du kĂch nhá» giÆ°ÆĄng cao sĂșng
Tháș±ng Má»č lĂȘnh khĂȘnh bÆ°á»c cĂși Äáș§u
Ra tháșż! To gan hÆĄn bĂ©o bỄng
Anh hĂčng ÄĂąu cứ pháșŁi mĂ y rĂąu!
# My attempt at English translation:
Petite militia girl raising high her gun
Towering American guy stoopingly walking, his head bent
So! Big liver (courage) better than fatty stomach (big body)
Heroism not having to be reserved just for men.
# There was a happy ending to the "Petite militia girl and the towering American guy" photo: They (Nguyá» n Thá» Kim Lai, 17 years old at the time the photo was taken on 20-09-1965, and American ex-pilot William Andrew Robinson, aged 22 then) met up again 30 years later, but this time as FRIENDS when Robinson came to visit Kim Lai at her home in HĂ TÄ©nh province in Central Vietnam (czcams.com/video/MDFcpVq_HZA/video.html )
Now, keep in mind this is a war we should never have joined in the first place. It was a civil war in a sovereign nation that we had no right to intrude on. In this case, just as in every case, the U.S. has no ability to make peace between warring factions. We can go in and bully one side or the other (or both) and tell them to play nice, but as soon as we leave, they're going to go right back to fighting. We're seeing this in Iraq right now. We should have just kept our nose out of it.
We were fighting the advancement of communism, but by our own account communism doesn't work and was bound to fail anyway ... AND IT DID! Russia fell, China has become better capitalists than the U.S., and today we are TRADING PARTNERS with Vietnam!
So, in the end what did we fight for? NOTHING! All of those dead men, women and children ... for NOTHING. Communism was going to fail anyway because it's an unsustainable model. We didn't need to fight it. It is its own worst enemy.
If we had just stayed out from the start, the war would have been over MUCH sooner. Fewer people would have died. And we could have become trading partners much sooner, increasing prosperity for everyone.
I disagree, but you do have some good arguments. The question is: Is it worth leaving the people of South Vietnam to suffer the way that they did? If North and South Vietnam remained separate could the South have become like South Korea or Thailand? Vietnam today is not nearly as bad as North Korea, but it is still a very poor country still with an oppressive government. Yes, Communism was bound to fail, but it wrecked so many lives in the process and recovery will take a long time in the future.
PlayStationMan55
Either way, it's still none of our business. Our constitution grants us no authority to deal in the affairs of other sovereign nations. Our founders warned us AGAINST entangling alliances.
PlayStationMan55 The only suffering the people of South Vietnam experienced was as a result of American violence, and the terror state installed by Washington in South Vietnam.
The question is: what right did the US have to attack & invade South Vietnam, cancel the nationwide free elections in 1956, impose a brutal dictatorship in South Vietnam, and commit genocide against the people of Indochina?
ahemcoughaaargh
Did your professor for your course in feminist studies teach you about the Vietnam War when she was high on dope? I see that historical facts are not your strong point.
PlayStationMan55 What the hell does feminism have to do with the Vietnam war? Everything I said was factual.
Fact 1 - The United States installed the Diem dictatorship in South Vietnam in 1954.
Fact 2 - The Diem dictatorship cancelled the nationwide free elections in 1956 when it became obvious he would lose.
Fact 3 - The US organized a massive terrorist attack against South Vietnam through the Diem dictatorship, targeting the nationalist forces which had fought the French.
Fact 4 - between 1954 & 1961 the US installed dictatorship had killed 70-80,000 people, from 1961 to the early 1965 escalation another 90,000 South Vietnamese were killed, tens of thousands of political prisoners were imprisoned.
Fact 5 - the murderous repression in South Vietnam led to the formation of a resistance movement which began defending South Vietnam from the American attack, the US then outright invaded South Vietnam organizing a counterinsurgency, bombing, destruction of food crops and "population control"
Fact 6 - The US began bombing North Vietnam in 1965 with the purpose of trying to get the North to use its influence to call of the resistance in the South.
Fact 7 - Between 3 - 4 million Vietnamese men, women and children were slaughtered in the American war of aggression, 600,000 Cambodians & 350,000 Laotians were slaughtered by the US genocidal bombing raids.
huh, haven't seen a Hollywood movie on this.. wonder why...
because hellywood and the media is owned by the globalist they will tell you how to think. China now owns hellywood and the globalist own them thats why.
Hollywood is more about emotion. Less in responsibility.
Maybe cos it isn't true?...
@@oxygen7445 you think Hollywood knows the truth? Do they make movies about the truth... or "based on a true story"?
How much is that story true & how much is made up. Hollywood is "make believe" Actors play make believe parts written for them. Are the writers truth tellers or "storytellers"? And how much is propaganda? Just like MSM not reporting the news...just their opinion on a story. No facts to back up their "stories". Easy enough to research.
Had family Military members killed in the Vietnam War...And No, they were not drafted. They volunteered, to serve & protect their country for our freedom.
God bless.
There has been like 3 where have you been
Love how my highschool AP US history class didn't talk about any of this besides the very basics. It also kinda pinned a lot of stuff on Nixon
Be careful taking any information as fact from PragerU. They push a political agenda to the point of falsifying history. Not that the lessons from high school should be taken as fact, either. Representatives in Texas, for example, are literally pushing bills through right now (2021) to white-wash history.
You are right, but Nixon was just a corrupt ass.
GABA DABA --The Vietnam war defies simplistic explanation, so donât rely on any single sourceâs depiction of it. Research it in breadth, and seek out accounts that even disagree with each other. You will likely find the war to be more complex, more nuanced than you presently understand.
please dont get any extra stuff on here, go watch some of the awesome actual documentaries
Nixon was just the scapegoat for the alphabet groups
Both of my grandfathers fought for the Paris peace agreement and died in their efforts, just for the US to shit on their graves. My love for my country is so bittersweet.
You know Nixon torpedoed the accords in '68. right? He got the South to walk away form the talks so he could get elected.
I cannot help but feel anger over learning the truth and truth be told it is those politicians hippies and communists in the US that disrespect your Grandfathers' grave.
The Democrats sold out Vietnam in order to get elected, they used the "anti-war" movement to get them up there. Because of that, all those who fought in Vietnam; especially those who gave their lives, died in vain.
Same as my grandfather's fortunately for me mine survived but your grandfather's along with mine won that war doesn't matter what other people may think we have the Paris peace accords and the NVA signatures to back the facts
As a "Vietnam Veteran", this is the *"WHY"* we say: *"GUTLESS POLITICIANS!"*
What about the Men forced to put their guts out.
Nixon savatoged peice to though he did End the draft
@@josh10722 your a fool or a commie just take a look at korea where would you prefer to live north or south? china or the USSR?
Thank you for your service sir.
What even were you doing over there
@@olofssonwarren USSR of course
'The advance of Communist Tyranny'
Oh yeah, because Ngo Dinh Diem's government was a liberal democracy, as was the US backed military dictatorship that followed him. The war in Vietnam was an intervention to protect American economic and strategic interests, it had nothing to do with a moral desire to protect Vietnamese people, who in truth wanted a united country under Ho Chi Minh.
+OisĂn O'Driscoll Thank you so much for thoroughly understanding our situation in the past.
your're right, but the problem is Mr.Ngo was both like a Catholic zealot and Buddhism mass killer. Just see what he did to the Buddhist monks: arresting, prohibiting, imprisoning and executing any individual who stood against him or those who fought for religion equality.
white dot on a black background but a lot more democratic
white dot on a black background still better than several millions death in the communist
+Android S Sure the communist is a fail system (we know it today), but at that moment in time there is nobody that can say for sure. So it all comes down to who is right and who's wrong, and no matter what you say, the north Vietnam was right, regardless of the fact that they chose the wrong system.
My uncles were among those boat people and he never came back.
My condolences.
@@capncake8837 Thanks!
Get rekt idiot
massive copium
True and accurate! I know. I was there with US Army in 1972!
Untrue, and completely inaccurate propaganda
@Dead Boy
You made a deal and then you violated that deal, which would have peacefully reunited Vietnam under a government elected by the people of South Vietnam.
They were not forced into anything. In fact it was Nixon & Kissinger who were forced to concede.
You don't want to take over countries? your record says otherwise; you're currently trying to take over Venezuela.
@Dead Boy People are starving in Gaza. What doesn't the US intervene against Israel if it is so concerned about starving people???
@Dead Boy A ridiculous response
@Dead Boy You clearly have no understanding of the Vietnam war. The people of South Vietnam did not need or want your "help." The people you were "saving" fought to get rid of you and your corrupt dictatorships that you imposed on them. The North was helping the South Vietnamese resistance get rid of you.
âUSA loses the warâ
Nixon: lets use the word withdraw
Media: whatâs the difference?
*_KOWALSKI ANALYSIS_*
We "lost" for political reasons not for miltary reasons,don't get it twisted.
@@RANDO4743 You lost because the North Vietnamese were better than you
@@davidcolley7714 is that why they lost 400,000+ men compared to the 58,000 Americans? They had better resolve but they did not beat us militarily.
@@RANDO4743 You had all the fire power and used it on civilians as well as the North Vietnamese liberators. How many South Vietnamese villages did the "zippo" squads burn down, not forgetting that people are still dying because of agent orange and the like. Even with the US firepower guys in black pyjamas and AK47s beat you. The USA is its short history has killed more civilians than any other nation. I hate all American governments for what they did in the past and what they are still doing now
@@davidcolley7714 cheetahs are the fastest land animals on earth since you want to bring up irrelevant information lol this conversation is about the military effectiveness of the united states.I said nothing about whether it was a moral good thing or not.america was affective but we lacked the resolve to endure because of the political pressure back home,we learned not to enter engagements half heartedly. As far as the middle east thats a whole other discussion.
Wow! I grew-up in that era and was a member of the Armed Forces at that time. Any Vietnam Era Veteran might well take a 5 minute Listen. It is a disgrace to our Nation (what we allowed to occur), and it cost millions of South Vietnamese their lives. A Tragedy and a Travesty. My LOVE is for the Fallen Heroes who will never learn of this betrayal and those who came back lacking public support and scarred from a war (conflict) we purposefully lost
Talking about Vietnam War or American War, there are a lot of controversies till these days. However, there were 3 key turning points that could prevent so much bloodshed between both sides. First of all, studying about the Ho Chi Minh letter which had sent to President Harry Truman in 1946. In that letter, President Ho would want to make an alliance with the USA for re-constructing Vietnam after WW2 (in WW2 Viet Minh was helping American get rid of the Japanese Imperial) and preventing the French colonialâs re-invasion, but the American kept in silence. Secondly, after the Frenchâs defeat at Dien Bien Phu 1954, both Communist and Capitalist forces should not divide Vietnam into half (because the divided country is always against the Vietnamese wish in general or President Ho Chi Minh in personal, Ho Chi Minh is nationalist rather than capitalist or communist, he only picked the side in order to help his people out or slavery). So, at this time American politicians again made alliance with a wrong side (South Vietnam). If there were no ideal of capitalism or communismâs involvement, Vietnam would become an independent country already and may follow the Western countries. But American was so afraid of the dominoâs affect, they were wrong at beginning and they kept it wrong once again. If American learned so well about Vietnamese history, they would know 3000 years the Vietnamese and the Chinese would never be a good alliance. Because the Vietnamese would do anything to defend the country and stay out of Chineseâs domination. The North Vietnam only borrowed the military support to fight the USA, and they made sure they used it well. However, by comparison to the Southern Vietnamese they were more dependable to American supports. That why, so much resources had been wasted, and the South people was no willing to win the war. Mistake by mistake, the USA politicians were so afraid of losing face that pushed them deeper into the shit hole. Thirdly, the attack of Tolkin Gulf was
totally made of fake, which triggered 11 further years of meaningless bloodshed for both sides. After all in 1973, American decided to withdraw military and resources out of the South leaving behind the whole failing campaigns, which they could be have as strategic alliance in South East Asia Region from beginning after WW2. As a result, in the end neither capitalism nor communism had won. It was the will of the people would want to be independent from Colonial and Imperial Force, no longer being slavery. The lessons of Vietnam War is the ultimate lesson of studying your enemy, and choosing the right partner. Nowadays, Vietnamâs politic still follow Communism in order to maintain the stability, but their Economic totally toward Capitalism (free trade). In diplomacy, Vietnam chooses to be neutral and ready to cooperate with any friends. And the most important thing is the will of every Vietnamese always exists the patriotism against from foreign force of domination, even the Chinese or whomever.
South Vietnam was a corrupt dictatorship without any backing in the rural population. The moment the US withdraw their troops South Vietnam was lost. You can replace as much equipment as you want but when there is no moral in the military and no support in the population it won't help.
Hhutuber
Hhutuber You should actually start reading about the many battle after the withdrawal of American ground troop, such as the red summer offensive. When properly equip ARVN is able to halt and push back the advancement of North Vietnam regular troops. It all about supply, while North Vietnam is being resupply by Russia and China, the US did not keep their words so all supply were cut off. It is hard to fight an enemy when you're limited to just 30 rounds per soldiers.
VU LE you are absolutely right , we pulled out in 1973 you guys fought off the aggressors for 2 years until you lost our aid to resupply you , I was there in 68-69-70 Quang Nam province Que Son Valley 1st Marine Div.
Andy Price Thank you for your service and sacrifice Sir.
So was South Korea but a dictatorship that is not communist is better than a communist one. They also fall faster than communism. Why do you think Castro is still in power but the other Latin American dictatorships are gone? It's because communism last longer. Look at South Korea now. LG, Hundai, Samsung, Kia and others have been produced while North Korea sucks. The same thing in Vietnam. The dictatorship in South Vietnam would have been gone by now but the communist one is still there. You can think liberalism for that screw up.
In the 1980s I was a welding teacher in Oakland CAand two of my class's were the boat people. These people were hard working and were ready to learn these skills. I was honored to work with them.
Not communist minded people right? Those were the people our brave military gave their lives for .they should be forever grateful.most democrats can't think for themselves and they believe others can't think for themselves either ...they are seriously mistaken and blind.
@@lonesometinman3147 Those were the people your "brave" military committed genocide & waged a criminal war of aggression against, that left their country in ruins.
the effort was against communist it was politicians and poor leadership that caused the mess plus the Democratic congress that took over after Nixon's resignation who refused funds for the South Vietnam people. Otherwise I honestly believe the outcome would have been different
@@lonesometinman3147 You don't know what you're talking about.
The effort was to create another American puppet state in the South.
The mess was caused by Nixon & Kissinger refusing to comply with the 1973 Paris Agreements.
yeah... I was taught it was it was JFKs war (a Democrat) escalated by Johnson (also a Democrat) either way ,nobody really wins in war ...only a fool likes war
A new Hollywood movie on this would be great.. but , we all know that will never happen
@Cardinal RG đđ right đ
No amount of bombs or death can break a peoples cry for freedom especily from a foreign enemy.
we never gave the Vietnamese freedom of choice, in fact our country did everything in its power to sabotage them.
@CZcams Deleted my Other Account for Mean Comments
It's wired cause kissenger was anti Israel. So you expect them to bash him.
When the trees start speaking vietnamese
Americans: confused screaming
inVietnam, when the trees start speaking vietnamese you know your already dead,
@@skeetrix5577 *you're
@@michaelpalmieri7335 you actually have no value left in life to go to 2 comments/replies and criticise their spellings.
@@skeetrix5577 Why don't you eat a grammar book?
@@maistrianpolitics Fine, if you want everyone to remain ignorant and illiterate all their lives.
but by then , 3 million Vietnamese died. what victory can be gain over such a loss of humankind?
Bottom line: it was their country and their civil war, not ours.
Letting the French back in at the end of WWII is where the "war" was lost.
Yes there is. Just not for you
As much as i disagree with this channel i am happy that they have not disabled comments and ratings.
Only leftist channels do that
THE VOID Well i don't think they show an entirely unbiased version of history and politics. Also calling themselves Prager University is a bit dishonest considering they are not a University.
That's what left do, be it USA, UK or India.
Jegria, fair enough. Fair points. Agree to disagree and compromise to find common ground and truths. I wish all conversations and debate were like this. We need this for our culture to survive.
Not a bad like to dislike bar tbh. 25-10 is a size able win
Dude, you guys back day, literally bombed our hospital where patients were taking a pills, bombed our school where kids were on a break after having a long day at classroom. This ,my friend, still wound our innocent souls
P/s my apologies for my bad grammar
This is prageru about as intellectual as a dead fish crab
The Spetsnaz destroyed the Americans in Vietnam. 2000 dead Americans for every 1 Spetsnaz killed. America is a weak country that acts tough.
@@levvy3006no not really were one of the biggest military superpowers on the planet if you call that weak then
Your just a idiot how doesn't now what there taking about
@nhĂ Äá»c tĂ i Yang Wen Li I agree!
@nhĂ Äá»c tĂ i Yang Wen Li
Oh please shut up you traitor
what the hell were you doing there in the first place?
"*Oh yeah we won the war, by LEAVING VIETNAM thats for sure, yey we won, we're leaving but we won*"
The US left Vietnam, only a couple of years later until the North invades again.
White343 Yeah, the US never beat the North and when the US left the North won.
Arthur Morgan All they did is to bomb the North and stopped the largest North Vietnamese Offensive during the Easter Offensive in 1972, it's more of a Defensive War on South Vietnam against PAVN. They did not go further North or there are consequences to unleash a Nuclear War with USSR and the CCP.
Edit: After the Easter Offensive, the US won the Vietnam War in the first phase until the Paris Peace Accords is signed and the majority of the US Military including other Foreign Military and Aid aligned with South Vietnam, left.
It took two years for the North to attack again which is after the Peace Treaty is signed. I call this the "Second Vietnam War".
White343 Well yeah, if you classify the part where Vietnam actually won as a separate war, than you can dishonestly claim that America one the original one.
Arthur Morgan I highly recommend you by reading the Biography of President ThiÄu, a former President of South Vietnam.
Also, Vietnam didn't win, they were separated and only the North won against a softened-up Southern counterpart after two years and this time where the Americans didn't involved once after the 1975 Spring Offensive commence.
And don't tell me that North Vietnam is still Vietnam. Try asking thousands of South Vietnamese who fled in exile.
We shouldn't have been there in the first place.....BUT.... it is unbelievably aggravating to hear people claim that America was dealt some sort of military defeat. The U.S. won every single major battle of the war, and inflicted many more casualties on the North Vietnamese than they inflicted on the U.S.. It was a waste of lives, and it was a pointless war, that alone is a sufficient condemnation, no need to lie.
I thought my comment was sufficiently narrow but since people are still confused, allow me to re-phrase. The Americans had far more success on the battlefield but still didn't achieve their geopolitical goals in the region. America's defeat in vietnam wasn't a military one. Also I'm not a fan of the war, and I don't think we should have been there. I just want people to be accurate in their criticism.
You said, "We shouldn't have been there in the first place..."
I agree with you about that, but then...
"The U.S. won every single major battle of the war..."
Two problems with that:
1. We didn't win every major battle. If we had, "We Were Soldiers" (aka The Battle of Ia Drang) would never have been made. Simply google "Major Vietnam Battles the US lost" and you'll get several lists of "battles" we lost.
2. Viet Nam was not a "battlefield" war. It was a guerilla war. Most of the engagements were brief encounters with Viet Cong or NVA forces. The time and place of those engagements were determined by them, they decided when to start, and they decided when to disengage and fade back into the jungle. "You can't fight an enemy you can't find." was a common complaint.
The US defeated the North Vietnamese in the Ia Drang Valley if you measure victory in terms of casualties inflicted. The North Vietnamese of course just turned right around and re-occupied the valley after the US pulled out, which speaks to your other point about the war being unconventional. U.S. soldiers complaining about the conditions in which they fought, or the unsatisfying goals of their missions (frequent search and destroy missions) doesnât really tell us much about the actual state of the conflict, just their morale, which would obviously be low in an unpopular war with no clear objectives. I didnât deny that the war was unconventional, and obviously it was different than what came before it, but the U.S. inflicted far more causalities on their opponents and were thwarted in entering and seizing territory far less often than their opponents. The territory seized can be written off as âthe Vietnamese were stealthy and snuck away when they needed toâ, and that explanation fits fairly well with historical accounts and extremely well with cinematic accounts, but one side taking horrific causalities and inflicting relatively few in return is harder to write off as just a strategy.
Reminder: I think the war was a tremendous waste and the U.S. was not morally justified in their intervention, I only add this because I feel weird being this close to âdefending the Vietnam warâ and donât want anyone to become confused and try to explain to me that the North ended up controlling the South in the end anyway.
Brett Lewis Let me step back for a minute. I'm a Vietnam Era Vet. I've spent the last two to three years researching that war, the reasons behind it and our involvement in it. (Some would say I've been immersed in the topic. My wife would say I've been obsessed with it. Over the years (37, so far) I've learned that she's usually right about things like that.)
I have to admit that I've developed a few reflexive responses to certain comments and phrases. I know you had no intention in doing so, but a couple of things you said triggered a reflex response from me. Perhaps a better way of saying that is, my interpretation of something you said triggered...
More than once I've been backed into the uncomfortable position of feeling as though I have to defend a position or point of view that I don't personally believe. I suspect that may be what I'm doing here to you. From your first comment you've been clear and consistent in stating that our involvement was a mistake, and I agree. Please excuse my overzealousness in picking nits over the details.
Thank you for your thoughts and interest.
You dont win a war by inflicting casualties, you win by taking territory. Everything else you said I agree with though.
Tbh the U.S supporting us helped us for some time. Even though they lost, many families were able to escape from the communist regime
Whaaaaaat..... LoL
@Uncle Ho and live live in your shithole country, eating the bones that china provide you.
@@Pinocchiomafioso it's only really a shithole because America destroyed the country , and killed 2 million civilians
It's not a shit hole if it is one of the fastest economically developing countries.
@@seankelly378 and dont forget all the other war crimes these shitholes committed
Don't forget the Tet Offensive, Our military won handily , except Walter Cronkite said we didn't. Big Political win for North Vietnam
Old Crankcase should have known better, but he let his Communist-sympathizing colleagues persuade him against his own better judgment. Maggie Higgins was by far the better journalist-reporter.
OUR VIETNAM NIGHTMARE.
Did you know Cronkite was a one world government supporter? I heard him taped speaking at a dinner probably in the 80s where he referred to Pat Robertson pointing out that antichrist/Satan would be leader of end times one world government. Cronkite laughingly said he was proud to be on the side of Satan then.
@@patriciat1514 Could just have been the deranged humor of the disbeliever. I don't think Crankcase was a very bright guy, just your friendly uncle type. The camera liked him too.
@@slukky I googled Walter Cronkite one world government and found some interesting info there. Also, the video is on Utube. It was actually at a UN event. He was sinister.
@@patriciat1514 Take away your own opinion/s-- czcams.com/video/Jowa_QuGKuM/video.html
Wow, interesting, Thanku for addressing that...
I am Vietnamese and I like America. However, In the war, America has been wrong in the origination. American shouldn't involve first Indochina war and backed for French to restore Indochina Federation. In 1945, Vietnam has coalition government,pro-America and Ho Chi Minh president wrote declaration of Independence with the quoting "American declaration of Independence" to show the friendly corporate to America. However, American refused to shake hands to Vietnam and pushed Vietnam to Communist
no no...youre the strongest country in the world you beated france south vietnam(supported by usa) usa china and cambodia....wow your so mighty and i really mean it
Wow, you north bought communism for yourselves and now blame the US for communism?
Crazy Gordon blaming us for comunisme?hhhhhh nice joke man u made my day
+Crazy Gordon I don't blame on anyone. Most of Vietnamese don't care about Communism or Capitalism, we only care independence, freedom for our nation. USA supported French to catch Vietnam into slave society like this before. If US had supported for Vietnam Independence instead of backing for French, Vietnam war would have never been occured
Communists don't dig borders nor independence or freedom, your argument has no basis in reality.
Who would win?
The whole American Army or a few Vietnamese Farmers with outdated guns?
WazzawProgram The US, if the Liberal Party took power in the White House, it's shit in your view.
us military
treu treu but you clearly don't look at the place their fighting in thats how the french lost against "some farmers" back in 1302 in the Battle of the Golden Spurs an army of one of the strongest countries in that time period lost to some flemish farmers with a self made weapon called the goedendag
Surprise is a really big equalizer. Knowing the forest better than you enemy is also. And I'm sure, the US would send their ENTIER army into Vietnam. Idiot.
all vietnamese hate communism, but usa dont help vietnam. they refuse.(because they dont want war vs china,russia) war between usa and russia-> north and south vietnam. vietnam,china,north korea,cuba... are communism. but vietnamese always love american. vietnam: north win-> poor. korea: south win-> rich. but now, vietnamese are hard working. if gdp can,up 10%/year 2016-2050(now 7%) we can same with korea or japan. i dont care about communism or capitalism. if you ask a vietnamese (9/10 they love usa,japan or korea, 10 hate china,communism) usa can't win because china ,russia help north vietnam. i love usa, japan. i hate china, all vietnamese hate china.(korea,japan,...hate china =)) srr my bad english
Solid, accurate account. It is a deep, embarrassing shame that our politicians sold out all that loss of life, treasure, and the South Vietnamese people.
It is a pack of lies
@@1968weedsmoke To you Libs who have never been to Vietnam or heard of the South Vietnamese perspective, yeah, it's a pack full of politically incorrect "lies".
Democrats always had a soft spot for the communists. If the target were modern-day, white, Christian Russia, they would've kept up the support no questions asked.
S. Vietnamese people didn't your ownership
Or did they realise that had no business in a country where half the population didn't want them there and their own soliders were facing severe PTSD upon returning back ?
Visited Vietnam, North and South, and asked students about the war... animosity against âAmerica?â We were there 30 years... the Vietnamese have been fighting China for 300 years. Historic perspective. Whatâs more, the people are very happy to meet people from all over the world... except their Vietnam War Ally... Russians.
it not true. Russia were one of VN allies; I am new generation after the war but I always have sympathy with Russian cause of what they did for us . But today in the world, nation interest first not only VN or US or Russia, any country may want the independence and respect from rest of the world. Do you think US is bigest, NO, see China and think again. Vietnamese have two thousand years traditional against China not 300 years.
That's because Russian don't visit Vietnam
Is Nha trang no longer in Vietnam? There are more Russians than Vietnamese there.
@@ThanhNguyen-ng1th actually, the US is bigger than China, both geographically and politically. And don't patronize the Russians, they assisted you North to spread their communism ideology, which was to rival the US and its allies' power in the Cold War.
George Varner
Really? I have no idea.
Bruh, Murica wasn't winning Nam, it was sending company of soldiers to their deaths in our jungles xD.
xD I'm a north Vietnamese commie livin in murica. lawl
now we beat the US of A. Which is a global superpower
Tet Kagamine the US couldn't have invaded the north as they were would have been declared a war by USSR and China if they did.
btw, the us of a didn't fight in the war just to secure vietnam , it was also to secure japan, which was murica's friend at the time
Without the threat of MAD, Vietnam could have been won in a few months.
I am still ashamed for voting Democratic most of my adult life. Please forgive me, Lord!
You are forgiven by me, if it means anything
@@colinnguyen2150 Thanks, brother.
@@TuanAnhTPBQ .. Me too đđŹ
Pass the word
I forgive you.
You people are like a cult or a sect.
Truth, without politics.
They all won.
Don't ever vote Dem again.
Iâm voting for Nixon.
D P Only did once .
Donnie Orangutan Nope
@Donnie Orangutan It's OK know-it-all I'll stick to the republicans
I was in week 6 of AIT at Ft. Polk La. when Saigon was taken. I was on CQ duty that morning and training was suspended.
I remember seeing my Commanders (all Vietnam Combat Veterans)sitting on the
curb crying like babies because they knew that their buddies had died in vane. That memory was etched in my brain. They knew what was coming to the People of South Vietnam. And it did...
God Bless America and God Bless those men and women who had to endure.
*vain
@@michaelpalmieri7335 you're so vein
@@7beers
Ha ha ha, very funny! đ
@@michaelpalmieri7335 Funny how?
@@7beers
Because you obviously misspelled the word "vain" for a second time on purpose, apparently to mock me for pointing out your previous misspelling of the same word. My response ("Ha ha ha, very funny! đ") was meant to be sarcastic.
Yes America won the war decisively... So decisively Saigon is now known as ho chi min city
You missed the point that he was making.
@@danspam You need to be a person to understand but communist are not people
@@RapidFire175 so are capitalist, they are ideologies
@@hoanglongnguyen3125 communist are not people
@@RapidFire175 well yes, i just said it. Communism is an ideology.
My grandpa was in the Vietnam war and he still alive
I'm a Vietnamese and we have defended ALOT of attacks from other contries mostly France
I mean... beating France anytime after the 19th century isn't really much to brag about.
@@johndavis3894 It is if you're a poor, third world country of peasants
@@johndavis3894 Tell that to the germans in WW1
stfu and grow some balls. Being rule by France is 100 times better than being rule under any Communism party. At least french soldiers didn't destroy my culture through cultural revolution.
@@seal1553 Vietnam is 2nd world, look it up online
Thanks to the professor! I am a young Vietnamese.
Thanks to the evidence and explanation of the professor, I understood the poor and poor and chaotic of Vietnam today.
We can not learn the history of truth. We were taught by the Communist Party propaganda.
Many thanks to the goodness of the professor and the Prager team!
Keep it up!
PháșŁn Trung PhỄc Nam This is mostly wrong. The us was 20 years in Vietnam, another 10 would have changed nothing. They were there for the wrong reason and lost. Good luck with your country
careful there, speak up wrong and off to the Gulags with you
Don't fall for the US PROPAGANDA my Asian brother.
really though, we haven't got much choice from 1945 anyway, so it's a mass tragedy
3que belike LMFAO
Thank you CZcams algorithm for uniting us.
This story needs to be told because it is not making the textbooks nor the popular understanding of how this war really ended.
Because its Not Like IT happened
@@7schlafer886 wrong.its EXACTLY how it happened. I was there.
Those of us that lived through that era know this to be an accurate description of events. It was the beginning of the long cycle of decay in America that continues to this day. The "Me" generation was gaining power and the "We" generation was kicked to the curb. That has led us to where we are now.
And it's happened again in Iraq.
The surge in 2007-2008 had secured stability in Iraq. The Democrats insisted on pulling out in 2011.
Now ISIS/ISIL is rampaging across Iraq... wiping out the hard fought gains that the veterans of them most recent generation (MY GENERATION) sacrificed so much to gain.
I spit upon the republicans for their failure to uphold the oaths of office so entrusted to them... but I DESPISE the democrats for being OUTRIGHT TRAITORS to MY nation and MY PEOPLE.
Charles Hammond Jr
I certainly understand where you are coming from. There is an old saying that those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Americans in general have the memory retention of a grasshopper. They knew what the democrats stood for and elected them anyway. That is why history is repeating itself. Some of your contempt could be saved for those people willing to sacrifice their country for a free phone or something else that other people have to pay for.
Mainstream republicans seem to be more focused on being liked rather than doing what is best for the country. They also deserve a healthy donation of your saliva.
Conservative republicans did try but they are to small a minority to accomplish anything without mainstream republicans and democrats willing to face down the liberal elite.
Democrat leadership are too smart not to learn from history and to do all the stupid things they are doing. Treason for personal gain seems to be the only logical explanation. They are truly a disgusting breed.
DrStrangel0ve2
What a surprise -- another Democrat whining like a little girl.
I notice you can't dispute one bit of what he says about the liberal twats selling out the Vietnamese people.
DrStrangel0ve2
I see that you really know nothing about that era. There are far to many gaps to be filled in. But I see history repeating itself again. We won the war but had to leave before we could secure the peace causing the whole thing to break down leading to mass deaths, reeducation camps, and the boat people. I see the same thing starting to happen now in Iraq.
History is something to be studied and learned from. Not ignored because it happened before you were born. Those who do not learn the lessons of the past are doomed to repeat it.
DrStrangel0ve2
The Maine. Wow. That wasn't very long after the Civil War. How did you dig that one up? You must have sucked some history up. Wait a minute. Did you just learn from history?
Even then the lesson of history in that matter is not to jump to conclusions without evidence. So that isn't a good example to support your position. Actually there are no good examples to support your position. Sometimes the lessons are good, sometimes bad. Shows the good side of human nature and the bad. Shows winning strategies and losing strategies. How to prevent a Hitler or stop a Hitler. Good causes for war and bad reasons for war. We have to learn the right lessons to secure the peace or history will keep repeating itself over and over. Wishful thinking or nit-picking wont do it. There was an effective strategy for securing the peace after the Civil War. We remembered that lesson after WW2 but forgot after VietNam and Iraq.
Amazing! I have a degree in history from a state institution and never learned this in my US-Vietnam War course, regarding the whole story behind the Paris Peace Accords.
There's a lot more involved with Vietnam, but this short lecture covers some important facts I have known since my youth. The treachery is also only partially explained by President Eisenhower's speech on the dangers of the 'Military Industrial complex'. You may go back further to those believers in a technocratic international imperium, such as Carol Quigley, Aldus Huxley, H.G. Wells and David Rockefeller, among a host of others. Of course facts do not matter when your mind is made up for you by others...
The American equivalent of the "Dolchstosslegende"
So basically, if we never involved ourselves in holding on to a French Colony tens of millions of people wouldn't have died and we'd still have the same Vietnam trading partner that we have today.
⊠only richer and hadnât lost 3 million lives. Well said.
French Lolđ. USA đ .
We lost our country (South Vietnam) to the evil North Vietnamese communist regime. If America kept its promise, it'd have been different. America, you owe us!
L shoulda fought harder
They gathered mountains of data claiming they were winning the Vietnam war but none of that data included what the north Vietnamese thought about it.
I hate how in todayâs age,people are told the Us lost the war, and then these people said we got our asses kicked and ran scared and had no clue how it really went down
Well last time I checked the north unified Vietnam soooooo pretty sure he US lost the war.
We were largely unsuccessful in beating the north in the war and recalled the troops, no single unbiased military would call that anything but an ass kicked
Yes you did
Cry about it
@@_ok1735 Master troll đ€Ł
No, no, your asses wasn't kicked, but sure, you got your cheeks clapped by rice farmers, loser.
Cry more, i am here to drink your tears haha
Dam we could of helped The South Vietnamese if Congress didn't stop the U.S support
There are 58,000 of my comrades names on the Vietnam Wall.
From 1966 on, many of them had died needlessly propping up a totally corrupt government in Saigon run by Vietnamese oligarchs that the ordinary peasants and working class passionately hated. And yet, instead of offering American help in the form of infrastructure repairs, agriculture and technical help to Ho Chi MIhn and the leaders in the South, we denounced Ho as a communist insurgent. In 1946, he wrote a Declaration of Independence from France with many of Thomas Jefferson's words. But instead, the threat of communist aggression was so fevered, we forgot how our own nation came about and interfered in a war against a colonial power by Vietnamese rebels.
In 1966, the Pentagon papers, written by Daniel Ellsburg ( a military analyst that was embedded in an infantry squad) proved that due to the FACT that the war was essentially a civil war in which we had no business, was unwinnable. We had merely taken over from the French after the Dien Bien Phu debacle in 1954. McNamara and Johnson knew this as early as 1966.
Yet, to appease the Military-Industrial-Legislative complex, and keep America factories producing war materiel, the war went on. Later, in 1968 after the TET offensive, and the Siege of Khe Sahn, Johnson and later Nixon, fearful of our image as a superpower facing the ignominy of a defeat at Khe Sahn, put more troops in.
From 1966 on, there was no thought of what we eventually did which was "Declare Victory and Get The Hell Out." We wasted an entire generation of young men needlessly, and further deaths from Agent Orange is still killing us today. Earlier this year, I recieved my 100% disability from the VA due to diabetes and ischemic heart disease, caused directly by Agent Orange.
I graduated high school in 1967, and had started college that fall, hoping to get a job in mechanical or electrical engineering. Instead, I joined the USNR to avoid Vietnam, but was sent there anyway. So, my life plans were disrupted by a war we should not have been in in the first place; and should have ended earlier. Even John Kennedy saw the folly of continuing to support the oligarchs and corrupt Saigon government and he was seriously considering withdrawing American military advisors.
Combine that with the fact the the ARVN troops were ARVN by day and VC by night, and that they couldn't fight their way out of a piss-soaked paper bag, we lost 58000 good men and women in a useless war. Merely supplying weapons and material to a people who did not want to fight would not have solved the problem after the 1974 Paris Peace accords.
the war had nothing to do with that it was to stop the commies... in one battle at Stalingrad over 2 000 000 were killed more than 5 times that of Vietnam war.
@@olofssonwarren I thought PragerU believed in nationalism and self-determination. Well, guess what, Vietnam and only Vietnam wanted to implement 'communism'. If it was truly so bad, they should have been allowed to make the mistake and learn from it. The Vietnam War spits in the face of national self-determination and is the ultimate hypocrisy. Both people and nations alike should be allowed the autonomy and agency to make their own mistakes.
I'm from Vietnam Gangs :))
My uncle flew planes in 'Nam. His father, my grandfather, was on boots in Italy. Uncle's still kicking but Grandpa's gone...I wish I could talk to them both about how much our country is screwed up.
Never give a promise you cannot keep.
Or maybe reality is USA agreed with USSR that communism would stop there.
You got that right. It is the same today.
In the Gulf war we destroyed Iraqi infrastructure to the point that we controlled the country.
We simply did not want this , it wasn't our goal.
We agreed to leave if our demands were met.
Although the peace community lauded Kingâs willingness to take a public stand against the war in Vietnam, many within the civil rights movement further distanced themselves from his stance. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, for example, issued a statement against merging the civil rights and peace movements. Undeterred, King, Spock, and Harry Belafonte led 10,000 demonstrators on an anti-war march to the United Nations on 15 April 1967.
Did you also know that Vietnamese people died in this war your country funded đł
And most of those congressional people are still there supposedly serving we the peopleđ€
One of which is now President.
I left with the last Air Force combat unit left in Vietnam. I remember a lot of words shared and promises made, which were not kept. Reminded me of the "treaties" between the Native Americans and the US. We had it won, however... Unfortunately, this is so true.
Legit the guy had nothing about the Hmong people helping them. Like come on my Culture can to America because the vitemnanmese people were killing us. Im not saying he is wrong and all but he should really include that Hmong people were related to this and helped amercians to win the war... not win just run
Thanks Mr chief Joe for your sacrifice in Nam
We ( south Vietnamese) are forever in debt to 58000 US Service personnel
@@TriNguyen-wg5np A Vietnamese thanking an American soldier for their "sacrifice" in Nam is like a Polish person thanking a German soldier for their sacrifice in Poland
seal1 the south Vietnamese never thought the US as an invader... we fought along side with the US to stop the tyranny of communism
The Us never wanted any land from The Republic of VN
You only see Vietnam war under the North Vietnamese point of View and label the south Vietnamese as bad guy
During Vietnam war the civilians alway run toward the ARVN for protection
Hundreds thousands people from the north flee to the south in 1954... hundred thousands or millions run away from the North ( the one you think is the good guy)
In 1975. And wow , when you compared the US as Germany,
Just like anti America propaganda
And I never be ashamed to say Thank to the US who fought with us.
@@TriNguyen-wg5np The South Vietnamese most certainly did see the US as an invader, and its installed puppet regimes as nothing but a continuation of colonialism. That is why there was an uprising in the South against the American backed regime there.
You only see the war from the American point of view.
No, the South Vietnamese resistance were the good guys. The US and its murderous puppet regimes were the bad guys.
"During Vietnam war the civilians always run toward the ARVN for protection"
They ran to where the bombs weren't being dropped.
"Hundreds thousands people from the north flee to the south in 1954..."
People went in both directions. A propaganda campaign led by Colonel Edward Lansdale called "Operation Exodus," encouraged people to come South with promises of land & livelihood.
Yes I compare the US to the Nazis. The American attack on your country slaughtered millions.
You should be ashamed.