Why the US Left Vietnam (Documentary)
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 04. 2024
- Get a NordVPN with a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months with a huge discount and 30-day money back guarantee: nordvpn.com/realtimehistory
With violent anti-war protests at home and discipline problems on US bases, President Nixon promises to withdraw American troops from the Vietnam War. But that doesn’t mean an end to the fighting. As US troop numbers drop, the war expands across borders and in the air as more weapons are pumped into the South
» SUPPORT US
/ realtimehistory
nebula.tv/realtimehistory
» THANK YOU TO OUR CO-PRODUCERS
David Garfinkle, Raymond Martin, Konstantin Bredyuk, Lisa Anderson, Brad Durbin, Jeremy K Jones, Murray Godfrey, John Ozment, Stephen Parker, Mavrides, Kristina Colburn, Stefan Jackowski, Cardboard, William Kincade, William Wallace, Daniel L Garza, Chris Daley, Malcolm Swan, Christoph Wolf, Simen Røste, Jim F Barlow, Taylor Allen, Adam Smith, James Giliberto, Albert B. Knapp MD, Tobias Wildenblanck, Richard L Benkin, Marco Kuhnert, Matt Barnes, Ramon Rijkhoek, Jan, Scott Deederly, gsporie, Kekoa, Bruce G. Hearns, Hans Broberg, Fogeltje
» SOURCES
Amter, Joseph A. “America Negotiates a Meaningless Peace” in Yancy, Diane (ed.), The Vietnam War, (San Diego, CA : Greenhaven Press Inc. 2001)
Anderson, David L. The Vietnam War, (Basingstoke : Palgrave MacMillan, 2005)
Appy, Christian G. Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam, (Chapel Hill, NC : University of North Carolina Press, 1993)
Appy, Christian G. Patriots: The Vietnam War Remembered From All Sides, (New York, NY : Viking, 2003)
Appy, Christian, Vietnam: The Definitive Oral History, Told From All Sides, (London : Ebury Press, 2006)
Blasiot, Leonard A., Dawson, David A., Shulimson, Jack & Smith, Charles R., U.S. Marines in Vietnam: The Defining Year 1968, (Washington DC : History and Museums Division HQ, US Marine Corps, 1997)
Bluhm Jr. Raymond K. (ed), The Vietnam War: A Chronology of War, (New York, NY : Universe Publishing, 2010)
Caputo, Philip, A Rumor of War, (New York, NY : Ballantine Books, 1977)
Daddis, Gregory A, Withdrawal: Reassessing America’s Final Years in Vietnam, (Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2017)
Ehrhart, W.D. Vietnam-Perkasie: A Combat Marine Memoir, (Jefferson NC : McFarland, 1983)
Gettleman, Marvin E. (ed), Vietnam: History, Documents and Opinions on a Major World Crisis, (Harmondsworth : Penguin Books Ltd, 1967)
Kolko, Gabriel, “Crisis in the Military” in Yancy, Diane (ed.), The Vietnam War, (San Diego, CA : Greenhaven Press Inc. 2001)
Langer, Howard J. The Vietnam War: An Encyclopedia of Quotations, (Westport, CT : Greenwood Press, 2005))
Lawrence, Mark Atwood, The Vietnam War: A Concise International History, (Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2008)
Longley, Kyle, Grunts: The American Combat Soldier in Vietnam, (Armonk N.Y. : M.E. Sharpe, 2008)
Moïse, Edwin E. Tonkin Gulf and the Escalation of the Vietnam War, (Annapolis, MD : Naval Institute Press, 2019)
Rotter, Andrew J. “Chronicle of a War Foretold: The United States and Vietnam, 1945-1954" in Lawrence, Mark Atwood & Logevall, Fredrik (eds), The First Vietnam War: Colonial Conflict and Cold War Crisis, (Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, 2007)
Ruane, Kevin (ed.), The Vietnam Wars, (Manchester : Manchester University Press, 2000)
Schulzinger, Robert D. “Antiwar Protests Rock America” in Yancy, Diane (ed.), The Vietnam War, (San Diego, CA : Greenhaven Press Inc. 2001)
Thee, Marek, “The Indochina Wars: Great Power Involvement - Escalation and Disengagement”, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 13, No. 2 (1976)
Tiu Bin, Following Ho Chi Minh: Memoir of a North Vietnamese Colonel, (Honolulu, HI : University of Hawaii Press, 2003)
Tovy, Tal, The Gulf of Tonkin: The United States and the Escalation in the Vietnam War, (New York, NY : Routledge, 2021)
Yancy, Diane (ed.), The Vietnam War, (San Diego, CA : Greenhaven Press Inc. 2001)
»CREDITS
Presented by: Jesse Alexander
Written by: Mark Newton
Director: Toni Steller
Editing: Toni Steller
Motion Design: Toni Steller, Philipp Appelt
Mixing, Mastering & Sound Design: above-zero.com
Research by: Mark Newton
Fact checking: Florian Wittig, Jesse Alexander
Executive Producer: Florian Wittig
Channel Design: Simon Buckmaster
Contains licensed material by getty images, AP and Reuters
Maps: MapTiler/OpenStreetMap Contributors & GEOlayers3
Music Library: Epidemic Sound
All rights reserved - Real Time History GmbH 2024
Get a NordVPN with a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months with a huge discount and 30-day money back guarantee: nordvpn.com/realtimehistory
I am also of the opinion that the My Lai massacre was overblown, and we are not alone. Those numbers you're talking about aren't insignificant, that's the American people with a common sense opinion.
Not hard to see why he was let go.
Great video.
Will you be covering the 1877 Russo Turkish War or the 1895 Sino Japanese War out of interest
Thank you Real Tme History. North Vietnam like Communist China are pre-industrialized countries. Their weapons come from the Soviet Union. Look at North Korea and South Korea. Where would you like to live? In the land of free speech anyone can say anything. North Korea or South Korea? That is the question. Long live liberalism and republicanism.
Awfully fitting to post this video on the Anniversary of the Fall of Saigon.
I am a Marine combat veteran of the Gulf War. There was a captain in my battalion who had served three tours in Vietnam and was an expert on our involvement and the history of Vietnam etc.
He spoke to us in depth about the war. This is not the forum to go into too many details but suffice it to say that despite winning every major battle and inflicting massive casualties on the NVA and VC - the war was an unwinnable quagmire. After 1969 the men in the field had had enough. They knew the war was for nothing. The pressure at home was huge to get out. Everybody wanted out. We spent the next 3 years slowly withdrawing.
I didn’t matter how many enemy soldiers we killed. They weren’t going anywhere. The South was doomed from the beginning. This is an excellent video.
You have all the watches, they have all the time?
It was a matter of survival for the vietnamese, while american soldiers didn't feel like they had any real business being half a world away
@@DanielGarcia-kw4ep exactly right.
Did your Capt. tell you how we Marines were turning on each other? Every problem America suffered back in the world we suffered in Nam. Drugs, race issues, suicides, fraggings were the reality I witnessed at Dong Ha from late 1968 until my rotation in July 1969; the difference was that in Nam we were all armed and dangerous - like America today. I began to feel it was safer outside the wire than inside. And I will always believe the Marine Corps got out of Vietnam because of these issues. Believe me, it got out of control.
The South actually was not doomed from the beginning if the CIA didn't give the "green light" on the coup aganist Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963 and further putting troops into the South. The act of aking Diem out gave the Viet Cong a huge relief on their side.
Sun Tzu said: "Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
Don't invade countries that got nothing to do w your country
@@RT-bt5ql Someone had to cleanup the french mess. They're fond of leaving messes around the globe.
@@KonglomeratYTcleaned up the french mess and created bigger mess 🥱
Salute to general giap
I'm hyped for the next episode. I always wanted to know more about the post-US Vietnam War
the outlook for the next three Vietnam episodes is:
- a deeper analysis of the US/South defeat as well as the Fall of Saigon (late June)
- Vietnam War: Forgotten Armies which will look at the non-US and non-Vietnamese armies in the conflict (summer)
- Vietnam War: Forgotten Fronts which will look at Cambodia, Laos and also include the short Sino-Vietnamese War (fall)
@@realtimehistory thanks for sharing!
@@realtimehistorythanks.
@@realtimehistory Looking forward to this series "Vietnam War: Forgotten Fronts"!
@@realtimehistory 3 more videos?!?! Wow fantastic!!
Thank you for continuing to cover The Vietnam war. It is still a very sore subject here in the US. So many history CZcamsrs won't touch it.
Economic effects indicate that LBJ understood after 1967,
that the cost of the Conflict was larger than any returns from exploiting Minerals or Oil,
could provide US Investors.
When the possibility of appropriating money for a War on Poverty became unaffordable,
Johnson's re-election chances appeared to dim.
The program was intended to fulfill Johnson's boyhood dream of eliminating poverty.
The Money was used up delivering payments to Brown & Root for infrastructure construction in Nam.
The clear implications of colonial conflicts that cost more,
than they could produce any return on investment,
appeared to make the continuation unaffordable.
The incentive for continuation of the conflict was over by 1968.
I wonder why that is. 🤔
Plus, they would do a horrible job of covering it. Just regurgitating clichés and false narratives from the new left boomer generation, who still view their opposition to the war as some great achievement of theirs while they further ruin the country at home in other areas.
@@danielhutchinson6604 Many say it had no gain. it definitely helped Russia go bankrupt, that and the space race. Today's Vietnam still has the US footprint, I believe the economy is setup more like China's.
@@kleamatwar crimes plus losing
My Great Grandpa was in the 1st Infantry Division during Vietnam. Yes, Great Grandpa. I'm younger and the Vietnam War is starting to get that old now. He saw his draft number coming up and figured he'd join as an MP, however was deployed on the front after partying with alcohol, and became an M60 Machine Gunner in the big red one. He got a purple heart after being hit by an enemy sniper (whether it's VC or NVA is unknown) as he didn't talk about it. Thankfully it missed most vital organs (including the spine), passing through his torso from the stomach out the back. Richard "Papa Lee" Hagan lived a long, happy life afterwards. However he never sought VA counsel, so around the end of his life he separated and lived alone in a cabin. The war haunted him until he passed in that cabin, but he had his dog Taco and neighbors checking every now and then. Rest in Peace, Papa Lee. Always missed.
aka Big Red One. I was part of the forward division in West Germany late 80's. Got reassigned stateside, my 1SG was a 1st ID Vietnam vet. Doesn't seem that long ago to me!
Always a pleasure to watch. Fascinating and enthralling, as always! Thank you so much.
I was a Vietnam Veteran before it became popular!
Iron Triangle 1969
Thank you for your service.
@@jasonpalacios1363
🙏🪖🇺🇸
@@jasonpalacios1363 service? killing civilians = a service???
@@MD72538 The Russian are doing a lot of that in Ukraine , i'm sure you don't think so!
@@jaypaige7550 stay on topic! If you want to switch, what about Iraq, Afghnistan and now Gaza?
Great outtro to a fine episode as always.
Funnily enough, I just read an article about Vietnam a few days ago. According to the article, the USSR and China sent insane amounts of aid to North Vietnam, to the point that the bombing campaign by the US was essentially useless, since they couldn't disrupt the flow of supplies, and there were no manufacturing centers to destroy.
Interesting point. Yeah, when you have two empire-sized superpowers behind you, you can pull impressive feats like beating the USA. Wow.
they ran into the same problem in Korea
Except the resources poured into NV was dwarfed by the amount poured into by US.
@@huntermad5668All that resources meant nothing if their not being used properly and where they'd count like multi-purpose F4 Phantoms for the Vietnamese Republic Air Force.
@@huntermad5668 US poured in a lot but as it was explained in the video the South Vitenamese were not trained enough to use it to its full potential.
Siempre se agradece esta serie documental, sigan así 👍
Great Video! Hoping they would make a video about the Battle of Ia Drang.
In Vietnam, we watched all the battles and I personally learned about each battle from many different sides. Ia drang was a sacrificial battle to consume American manpower and it was very terrible.
I'm usmc viet vet left Dec 1972 the country was in great shape then
It was torn by civil war.
Navy Vet here, I have two brother in laws, both Viet Nam Vets who served right after Tet, one who did two tours, who would disagree with you on that.
This is an awesome channel with first rate content. Thanks so much!
Cause we shouldn’t have been their to begin with.
100% percent. The war was doomed to fail from the start.
things Reddit tells us for $100, Alex 😅
Communist International radicals shouldn't have been there to begin with.
@@GeneralBlorplol no Reddit has suddenly shifted into saying that the US had to be in Vietnam and that the 2003 Iraq war was justified, and bush is hecking wholesome. Get on with the times grandpa 😅
One sentence, four errors.
Do better.
Super wonderful historical coverage episode shared by an excellent ( RTH) channel... thanks for sharing 👍🏻
Amazing outro, as usual!
You have to be kidding someone
Just curious, did the views go up, and the hate comments go down after you changed the title from Lost to Left?
My dad fought for the South, but you know how he was "drafted". He said the army rolled into his village in the early morning, kicked down doors and dragged out every male who looked near service age and tossed them in trucks. Congratulations, they're in the army now.
Sounds like Ukraine’ now
Sorry, but the North Vietnamese side is the same. Even when they are only 13 years old, they are forced to join the army. What is advertised as voluntary is actually because their families are too poor and their families will be subsidized to join the army, so they go. Most of the children of officials above do not go to the battlefield. but were sent to study in the Soviet Union and China, most of them on the battlefield were commanders or not in suicide assault teams.
@thaophamthanh440 Need a source for that bud. For now this just sounds like salty US revenge propaganda.
@@ucanhvungoc7133 www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21624887.2022.2073740
research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/32163/1/POL_thesis_NguyenM_2022.pdf
Salty? I don’t think so
@@thaophamthanh440Khmer Separatists propaganda. You have zero proof of this.
Thank you.
It is quite interesting that the Vietnamization programs were similar to the Americanization efforts of the American Revolution. Both Great Britain and the United States had to allocate resources to other conflicts as well as face political pressures from home, which required the use of locally raised troops to bear the brunt of the fighting and to hopefully pacify the populations. With the American Revolution, Great Britain's efforts came crashing down after the Battle of King's Mountain where Britain's best recruitment officer, Major Patrick Ferguson, was killed and his entire force of 900-1,100 men was annihilated. The United States' own major attempt to push ARVN to bear the brunt of the war in the first real test of its capabilities proved to be an unmitigated disaster during Operation Lam Son 719. And though the programs would continue with some mixed results, the fact was that this campaign was a major red flag for how ARVN would handle itself during future operations.
Defending one’s homeland cannot be compared to fighting for political ideology
In fact, that campaign was exposed because North Vietnamese communist insiders were deeply embedded within ARVN. If the campaign was successful, it would have been a strong blow to the North Vietnamese communists
@@BufordTGleason if that’s your faulty logic, the Cham people were there longer than any Vietnamese, North or South. Both oppressed them.
@@BufordTGleasonThey were fighting for their homeland.
@@ucnguyenanh9414 The secret sauce is that the North very cleverly had a massive public aid program thanks to Russian and Chinese imported food, medicine etc. Despite there being a war on, the people in the North saw their life continue to improve as the gouvernment kept delivering food, medicine and actively worked to build schools, hospitals and other ammenities. They may have been little more than rickety bamboo structures, but they had nothing before that under the French and Japanese.
Now after the war things got a bit more messy as the gouvernment became more authoritiarian and had to deal with the people in the South. Left a bitter aftertaste, just like sidelining many of the people who had contributed to the ultimate victory like Giap and some who were too close to China when those relations became a bit dodgy.
During the war many people saw clear improvement to their lives, so they figured "This is worth fighting for." After that, things were a bit more nuanced.
Nixon’s foreign policy was all about a sharing of defensive responsibilities with states that the US had treaties with. The US didn’t have a treaty with South Vietnam and therefore Vietnamization was his policy to withdraw. Additionally, the Paris Peace Accords were prolonged by the NVA. Nixon’s response to bring North Vietnam to the negotiating table was to resume bombing of North Vietnam with Operations Linebacker I and II.
LOL, NV already accepted the conditions, that was Thieu refused those conditions
I actually blame that slippery snake Kissinger for most of Nixon's disastrous Vietnam policy.
You are correct.
@@markgarrett3647 it wasn’t a disaster.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 The Vietnamese boat people who fled by the millions beg to differ.
Great video
Fascinating history.
Do a video on the US leaving Afghanistan next! Very similar situation.
Ask mr joe
In vn war that time biden did that too
Love that you present the facts and events as they happened and don't put a political spin or bias on it. The comment section does that for you guys haha
Who doesn't like to spin a bias? You go first
I have lived here in Vietnam for 3 years in the North as an English teacher. Living history as both a US veteran and someone who loves history and wants to understand both sides
LBJ, early after the build-up whined to his military that he could not understand why the North Vietnamese did not just back off under American pressure. One military staffer said that the situation was deeply rooted in the history of that place. LBJ lost his temper and said... "I don't want to hear any history...we have American boys being killed." Like a surgeon refusing to listen to why he needed to disinfect his surgical instruments prior to an operation. Vanishing hope for a positive outcome... YP
Appreciate that you are willing to take a stab at the Vietnam war. It's still a living memory so there is a lot of debates and what if scenarios such as whether North Vietnam could be defeated if the decision was to keep US troops. It also really calls into question of US policy of supporting unpopular governments for the sake of containing communism.
It's a holiday in Cambodia! It's tough, kid, but it's life! It's a holiday in Cambodia! Don't forget to pack a wife!
Me when I realize this presenter and OverSimplified are the same guy:
I've seen lots of Vietnam War videos on here over the years, but few offering the unique approach and perspective and presentation, of yours. I have long felt that most American politicians knew that the Vietnam War was unwinnable after the Tet Offensive (and so much more) so what had been said after was mostly about politics and gaining the approval of the American public and winning elections. I too, had questioned the statement that the Christmas bombings were the sole reason that the North Vietnamese had returned to the negotiating table.
I very much enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
My kind of mental hospital!
I laughed out loud when he said "occasionally gets mistaken for a mental hospital"
Just emphasizing how wasted South Vietnam Army was: The captured equipments have been repurposed to fight against the Pol Pot regime even Red Khmer was just nothing but the ashes in 1985. And those captured equipments were about to last "in few month" under South Vietnam's estimation.
I've watched a lot of content on the Vietnam War and this is very condensed and well presented, Also, it contains photos I've never seen before and that's always interesting.
The US just never had a proper plan for South Vietnam. They concentrated on the military part and made no real effort on the nation building part. Aside from being afraid of the communist north's wrath and not wanting to live in an oppressive regime the south-vietnamese didn't have any love for their own state as it was only a different shade of oppressive. Why should you fight tooth and nail for a country you have no love for, that doesn't provide for you in any meaningful capacity and that is unstable at best?
And the sad part is they made the same mistake again three decades later in Afghanistan.
chiếu đấu cho 1 đất nước mình không yêu mến . Không phải đâu. Vì US muốn ngăn chặn làn sóng đỏ từ trung quốc nga xô tràn xuống đông nam á sau VN là Lào. CAMBODIA. THAI LAN. PHILIPIN. NEWZILAND. USTRAYLIA. Do đó VN là tiền đồn ngăn chặn làn sóng cộng sản đỏ
Dont be silly It was for making profits And boy did they made money YAHOO
Afghanistan was different. There was tons of money for infrastructure and internal civilian programs poured in. The population outside of a few cities didn’t see what was so great about them and felt a huge disconnect over their necessity.
Because most of the Southern population were all Communists symphathizer, not because they love communism, frankly only the anti-communists in the country give a s**t about ideology, but the communists were actually the one who fought against the French while the South Vietnam gov was formed by the people who fought for the French. To top it of this "South Vietnam" secceding half of their country and blew up the chance for the country to be reunited by the general election that should have been held in 1956. So it's no wonder few Vietnamese had any love for the Separatists.
Remember Free Birds, if the deal you sign after the fight remain much the same thing you rejected before, no matter how big you making up, you lost that fight
You're made-up rules aside, yes indeed, the Vietnamese ultimately lost that fight and were defeated. Now Vietnamese have to have a giant Lenin statue pointing at them everyday. Oh well, Vietnam lost but they did at least win the next war when China invaded.
@@topsuperseven7910 uh, come again, what is your evidence for the argument of VN losing ? And how come America have to sign the deal they rejected before could be considered a victory, Free Bird ?
@@vinhucnguyen2575 hello, the 'evidence' would be when the Vietcong rebels surged into Saigon and took full control and Vietnam surrendered.
It's in this video.
Vietnam most definitely lost.
Remember, if you sign a deal you considered a victory but rejected before it means it was a victory before.
Mind you, the US wasn't interested in signing 'Victory' for Vietnam but rather anything that they hoped would keep both sides from continued fighting.
It was temporarily successful but of course the traitors ignored it and went on to defeat Vietnam.
@@topsuperseven7910 So you agree that not only the US had their puppet regime of South Vietnam fallen and have to withdraw their forces from VN ( which definitely sound like a loss), but also was acting treacherously and cowardly when leaving the Saigon government on the hand of the Vietnamese despite being its founder and claiming how the war must happened because the US need to protect its allies and interest in Vietnam ?
@@vinhucnguyen2575 Being forced to signing a peace treaty to end a war sounds a lot like losing to me, and that's what happened with NV. Just cause NV decided to invade again a year later doesn't mean they "won" the prior war. They were fighting a completely unsupported SV lol.
I don't know why you say the 1968 election was closely contested. Even with Wallace spoiling Nixon had many more electoral votes.
Great work! Go on.
"The truth is that the US won the war militarily but the US lost the war politically" as what Thomas Sowell said.
What would the US have won??
@@davidbradley3735 In other words there was no support of the war back home, so no support at home, you lose war, period.
@@jasonpalacios1363Well, duh. When you throw away a large numbers of lives and tax money to some country half the globe away that wouldn't threat your national security, people back home aren't going to appreciate it.
Why is this 'Nixon's Vietnam War'? More accurate to say 'Kennedy's War' He got us involved. Under him, US troop strength hit 23K - he also gave us the Bay of Pigs disaster.
see previous episodes for our coverage of that part of the war
Top tier presentation.
Nguyen is pronounced "Win", not "New ee in".
And not a damn thing was learned
Surely we learned from Afghanistan now. Surely.
You don’t even understand the conflict.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 It is complicated with only 4th grade...
Our enemies learned.
@@Karlach_ If you think wars over politics can impart lessons then you know nothing about Republics. Go back to school lmao. Elections drive decision-making. Not history.
at least the military industrial complex benefited from the warcrimes 🥰🥰🥰
that's all that matters
Hardly much sympathy when you’re fighting a side also committing war crimes.
and how much money did they make from the my lai massacre?
Investments in aviation paid out big dolla dolla bills 🤑
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 if believing that makes you feel better, sure
@@Hys-01 you have your coping narratives, but I don’t need them.
This war was such a disaster.
That does it! Viktor no longer on Klaus and Ursula's "People to Let Live" list.
It's amazing that the U.S. govt ended up making the exact same mistakes 30 years later in Afghanistan/Iraq. Especially considering that some of them were guys who experienced the war firsthand.
When you consider that they rose the ranks by being Yes Men, it isn't amazing at all.
It's not mistakes. War is business
@@houm7571And US lost profits in this war
Us.army no defeated in Vietnam..but politics in Washington defeated in the war..I am 66 year old from Thailand.😂
It certainly was certainly worn down. What's an army if their own soldiers and public are unwilling to support its actions? Well, it's a morally defeated army. It doesn't help that South Vietnam was itself a corpse eating away at itself, thus why it failed to even launch proper or successful military offensives against the North.
It should be noted that Thailand contributed much to the Vietnam War.
@@SandfordSmythe sorry my English very poor..ขอตอบเป็นภาษาไทยนะครับ/ไทยยืนข้างอเมริกันในสงครามเย็นที่เวียดนามใต้ ส่งทหารไปร่วมรบเคียงบ่าร่วมกับพันธมิตรในเวียดนามใต้..ให้อเมริกันมีฐานบืน (US.Airbase)หลายแห่งในประเทศ..มันเป็นการเลือกข้างระหว่างฝ่ายเสรีประชาธิปไตยกับฝ่ายคอมมิวนิสต์/เมื่อสงครามสงบ คนเวียดนามเกลียดไทยมาก หาว่าไทยเป็นลูกน้องอเมริกา.. และในวันนี้ไทยมีความเจริญ.มากกว่าเวียดนามและสหายคอมมิวนิสต์....คนหนุ่มสาวเวียดนามพากันมาเที่ยวไทยเป็นจำนวนมากในวันนี้ ..
@@user-lw6gy9xm8lBây giờ Việt Nam đang thịnh vượng hơn Thái Lan mới đúng. Việt Nam vượt trội hơn Thái Lan về công nghiệp lẫn nông nghiệp trong khi Thái Lan hòa bình và độc lập hơn 100 năm. Việt Nam không ghét Thái Lan, Thái Lan chưa bao giờ là đối thủ để Việt Nam cạnh tranh.
@@user-lw6gy9xm8lDu lịch Thái Lan đang bị Việt Nam bắt kịp, công nghiệp và nông nghiệp Việt Nam đã vượt trội Thái Lan rất xa. GDP thực của Thái Lan thấp hơn Việt Nam từ hồi năm 2020. 😂😂😂😂😂
Excellent Video. It should have many more Views. Its a shame how youtube doenst support such formats more.
Hello do you plan to continue napoleon's downfall with the 1814 campaign?
Score board
*North Vietnam turns communist*
US: hall nah that's not ok
*gets into a war it can't win and then loses*
People: well lets just hope they won't do some thing like this again
US: about that 🤭
It wasn't that we couldn't win, it was that we weren't allowed to win because of politics, don't be disingenuous.
@@georgefalcon14 Yeah, I know it's a tough pill to swallow but the US were beaten in Vietnam. Gotta take the L on this one, I'm afraid.
@@heycidskyja4668 yeah many historians agree that, the was going to loss this war because of the fact that the the vietnamese had home field advantage
It wasn’t that we couldn’t win, we actually had won quite a bit in the north. But if you don’t have support from the domestic population then you’re not going to be able to sustain the war effort. The United States far and away could have won the Vietnam War as we had nuclear weapons and a vast technological advantage alongside superior tactics. The problem was nobody at home wanted to fight the war and thus America pulled out
@@heycidskyja4668 I said we lost, but reading comprehension seems to have eluded you, maybe take the W and research the truth of "Why," instead of just jumping on the defeatist bandwagon 🤔
One can not fight a war by way of political input which skews the overall goal to the troops who become confused of "Why We Fight."
This content is gold❤
"How A peasant Nation humbled a Superpower."
Is that it?
Yeah,that's it.
The USA won almost every single battle in Vietnam. If China and the USSR wasn't supplying the Viet Cong then the USA would've starved them out.
Despite this, the USA killed millions of Viet Cong and the Viet Cong couldn't Even kill a single 100k of US soldiers.
It's a fascinating and tragic story because the US knew they lost, but didn't want to pay the political and reputational consequences for losing. But they did anyway, and did so after the cost of more US and Vietnamese lives alike.
Sunk cost fallacy...
The defeat was never inevitable and it took all of the pro-Communists within the Federal government and the MSM to produce it.
That was Kissinger‘s suspected opinion. In reality though, I don’t think it actually was his opinion. I think that’s what partisan historians and journalists have attributed as his thought process at the time when that wasn’t the case.
Ego won't let the leaders admit to wrongdoing and everyone suffers
We didn't lose
The reason why Europeans and Westerners fought wars in the jungles of the Pacific region is difficult. Because of Western methods of fighting and Europe as a weak point, by not secretly, hiding, or using guerrilla warfare. The same is true for Vietnamese and Thai people The people of South Asia are forest experts and therefore have an advantage
9:05 Bamboo pentagon, lol.
What a disappointment, the Tet offensive gets a whole video dedicated to the subject but the Easter Offensive is reduced to a footnote despite it’s significant impact on the 1973 ceasefire and it’s interesting way of war, the most conventional of the entire war and the deadliest land invasion since the Chinese offensive in the Korean War.
I guess western historians cannot escape heavily portraying the “Vietnam” war from the “American” perspective which had been regurgitated over and over again in most history outlets.
However I do understand that it’s easier and safer to do a subject that’s statistically popular to portray and understand for a content creation channel.
I agree with you to a degree. I agree it should’ve been its own episode.
They will continue to cover the other more conventional parts of Vietnam from 1973-75, the third Indochina War and other battles
A correct title would be "why US was defeated in Vietnam"
but this episode is only part of that. we will do a full analysis in a future video
Yeah maybe. "The USA failed to achieve our political and military goals" is the truth. But there was a certain amount of scheming combined with the stark truth being realized that, if the South Vietnamese were given every chance, every American resource including human blood, and billions of dollars, yet STILL was incapable of defeating the communists in the north, then there was no point for the US to prop them up any longer.
The reasons why the US lost the war are numerous and sometimes contradictory, but in a nutshell, this is what someone once said to me about US involvement in Vietnam: "We couldn't win, but we refused to lose."
the correct title should be "here's why the my lai massacre acstually happened, trust us" also here's a more accurate title "here's how the ARVN was defeated in Vietnam"
@@grdfhrghrggrtwqqudo you doubt the historicity of the My Lai Massacre?!
It really was a weapons test imo but I could be wrong. I mean especially in the air war we put guns back on fighters after the horrid performance of the f-4 without guns lol
Can you guys do a possible episode about Malayan Emergency? Or the Suez Crisis
Nixon the goat
I still have not figured out why the US went into Viet Nam in the first place, I don't buy that domino theory at all. JKF, LBJ, Nixon and Macnamara are all on record saying that a war there would be unwinnable yet they all sent US troops there.
I do know that the CIA was running drugs from the area, maybe they wanted to protect that operation.
The military has a powerful lobby in Washington and always wants a war somewhere. When LBJ resigned he had ammassed a $900 million dollar fortune from investing in military stock.
Perhaps it was just plain old hubris.
In the end the US and South Viet Nam did lose and consequently lost a huge amount of prestige in the process, not forgetting the 58,000 Americns who gave their lives.
I think its hubris fueled by inconclusive result from Korea few years back. US wanted to show that its the main superpower in the world and can operate to high level from other side of the world. Give few years and they were so entangled to their pride that they just couldn't lose the war, dragging it to infinity.
The military-industrial complex wanted money, and the capitalists were afraid of a new economic system reducing their hold on the planet’s wealth. Whether they actually believed in the domino theory or just used it as justification, 🤷♂️
How do you know lol
Domino “theory” was observable reality before and after the fact of this conflict.
The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who's going to stop me? - Ayn Rand
Kinda like why dude left his old job, didn't feel right to hang around after I got fired. Or rather the company I was working for got taken over by North Vietnam
The My Lai massacre, and the widespread support for its perpetrators in the US, is something that I wish more Americans knew about. Most would rather forget all of the horrors of Vietnam, the millions of Vietnamese who died because a foreign power felt entitled to determine the country's political system and government. After the horrible crimes committed by Russian forces in Bucha during the invasion of Ukraine, many American commentators wondered how the Russian people could support an army which murdered innocent civilians. Sadly the answer can be found in America's own history, but the refusal to remember and learn from history makes that impossible.
The video didn't mention it, but several US soldiers who attempted to stop the killing, and helped hide Vietnamese civilians during the My Lai massacre, were ostracized and shunned within the Army. They were also called traitors by a multiple US Congressmen from both parties. It wasn't until 30 years after the war crime was committed that these soldiers were recognized for their attempts to help innocent civilians during wartime. Unfortunately very similar war crimes were later committed by American soldiers in Iraq, further demonstrating the cost of refusing to remember such crimes, or to properly bring war criminals to justice. Hopefully this channel and videos like this can make a small difference in fixing this problem, though a real solution needs to take place at a much larger, societal scale.
What do you think you’re babbling about? This almost sounds peak millennial.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 It's called history. I'd encourage you to learn more about it, though it will require you to read a book, which you might consider a "peak millennial" waste of time. But I have to thank you at the same time, as you provided an excellent example of the refusal to confront difficult moments from US history. It's much easier for people to reach for juvenile insults than to actually reflect on what happened in places like My Lai.
@@zvexevz there you go again.
Same situation as Afghanistan. They were unwinnable situations.
With due respect to those who fought the unpopular war. Soldiers obey, and politicians dictate all for nothing. It was deemed other people's war.
It's important to note other aspects of the change in US policy. Bombing runs in the North had been systematic, predictable, and ineffective. The general military strategy was killing more than were lost rather than securing territory. Troops were repeatedly put into massive battles for the same territory over and over again, and when they needed air support, they would have to get permission from those all the way back in Washington. Furthermore, the media coverage following the Tet Offensive was completely biased against the war even though it marked essentially the end of the Viet Cong.
Furthermore, the political situation was the worst it had been. The racial tensions, peak drug use, and the highest support for Communism all contributed to a defeatist attitude. There were many elites who believed that Communism would win the Cold War. This view was strong on college campuses as many young men stayed in college to avoid the draft.
You gotta go easy on the American military since they faced a lot of restrictions on how and where they could conduct the War but what would have helped was LBJ blockading the Communist ports along the Gulf of Tonkin and the Cambodian port of Sihanoukville.
bc we got bored
Ironically a war of attrition that backfired
Becaus3 you got clapped hard
Intefering a foreign country, killing protesters, massacring civilians, breaking promises, chaotic strategy due to political system, and bringing back home drug addicts with PTSDs. Truly a beacon of light for all human beings.
Unfortunately tho, Korea wasn't able to reunite under one flag. I wonder how things would have been for them.
Have you seen Vietnam today?
@@user-td2jw9ze2cviệt nam giờ sao? Tao sống ở việt nam đây. Hòa bình và thoải mái.
You have been listening to too much propaganda
Neither Kim or any South Korean defeated the Japanese. Ho Chi Minh led the Vietnamese people to victory agaisnt the French, while the "Southern" pretenders fought along side the French.
There's the difference.
@@ArtSmosh1274same as yours
Am i dumb or did i watch this on nebula already?
nothing about the shape of the negotiating table.
And you will be happy to know Vietnam is now just another little capitalist country and doing very well too. We know why the US left I want to know why you were there in the first place
Vietnam is a socialist republic still lead by the communist party of vietnam.
Vietnam chose capitalism by choice, US had no role in it.
Hello, please use the correct term "Lost" in the name of the video. Thanks!
Won? never happened
The actual Northern Victory and the analysis why will happen in the next video, this video is about the decision to withdraw ground troops. Which didn't completely end US involvement.
09:38 Historical fact: The Jackson State killings were not related to the war in Southeast Asia.
This tragedy happened 11 days after the Kent State killings and is sometimes considered part the anti war protest movement but it actually was part of the civil rights struggle.
The only thing these two events really have in common is overreaction by authorities to campus unrest.
Some argue that the reason Kent State is more infamous is because it was white students that were murdered and Jackson State would hardly be remembered otherwise.
It's really pretty simple. For the most part guerrilla wars are tough to win.
Most people forget that the US had a miserable affair in the Phillipines (early 1900s) that rarely gets discussed. Precursor to Vietnam.
Too many ads.
Welcome to modern youtube lol stop using chrome
@@Mantriox I don't use chrome. Your comment is asinine.
ublock my guy, ublock
3:10 Undermining US strategic interests in the name of partisan politics has been in the GOP playbook for a long time.
Well Kissinger was a former Democrat supposedly.
@@markgarrett3647 Kissinger was neither. He only cared about power. Whoever was in power was what he was, at that time.
@@kropotkinsbeard7017 And yet his actions seem to benefit his former political party.
@@markgarrett3647 Except for the fact that he was helping to undermine the peace process. For Nixon. While he was employed by the Johnson administration.
@@kropotkinsbeard7017 Nixon conspiring to undermine the negotiations between the LBJ administration and Communist Vietnamese is a myth and patently false.
The Republic of Vietnam government stance and public opinions have long hardened against any sort of peace deal after the bloody Communist Vietnamese Tet offensives and the massacres that followed.
Cause when you are the bad guy, you never gonna win. Vietnamese were defending their home.
Big question should be, could South Vietnam have survived(like South Korea) without too many US troops on the ground.
Nixon: gets re elected
Nv: no renegotiate
Nixon: I wasn't asking
Linebacker starts
10 days later
Nv: Screaming and pissing itself in fear..
TRUE.
Nixon made the right tough call.
Dozens of planes were shut down and 16 B 52s too, it was a last trick which failed, USA lost this war.
Renegotiate from a decent interval to withdrawal to withdrawal within 60 days. Plus, North Vietnam's military still got to stay in the south.
I don't see any North Vietnam fear or compromise here. Just more US concessions so that they can leave and abandon the South as soon as possible.
@@cuongle7990 Nixon abandoned no one.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 Nixon didn't get to choose. His advisors, generals, negotiators, and the US public wanted him to leave the country. So after the bombings the North got more concessions out of negotiations. And the South stood alone, then fell without US help anyway.
I remember my entire life being told Vietnam was the republicans and Nixon's fault.
The stupidity of the GOP to continue a Democratic war under the guise of patriotism
Well, of course. Democrats screwed up the beginning of the conflict and constantly lied to the American people poisoning the well. Then endlessly criticized Nixon despite him achieving the most progress and actually getting results. Then when he was forced to resign due to unrelated internal political matters, they didn’t even allow president Ford to give South Vietnam air support when North Vietnam broke their signed treaty, who saw their last chance for invasion and conquest as the Democrats took all of Congress.
Democrats caused the war in many ways, ran the war idiotically, and then voted to abandon of South Vietnam, while framing it to their base that they had save them from going back. And of course, Democrats dominate in the media and in Hollywood. So of course it’s Nixon’s fault in the popular Normie imagination.
That'a the first time I've ever heard of Nixon being solely to blame for Vietnam's loss. For me, it's clear both parties were responsible for willingly trying to twist the war to their own political benefits (and subsequently failing as a result)
@@extrahistory8956 Yea I like to remind folks the Dems did not become anti-war till a Republican president not defending Nixion just pointing out the hypocrisy of the Dems
It cost an awful a lot of money to keep an army halfway around the world for 11 years. By that time, it was clear there would be no victory
During mid 50s, Soviet conflicted against China over who should be the leader of Communist World, leading to a border clash in 1969. Acknowledging that Soviet was a bigger threat, US secretly cooperated with China in order to isolate and topple the Union. (which eventually resulted in its dissolution in 1991). To swap their benefits, US withdrew from Vietnam and let South Vietnamese fight alone so that the South is faster and more easily to lose this war. From 1972-1973, ARVN had to rely on themselves and kept fighting against North Vietnam and their communist allies. Simply put, they used whatever ammos and weapons left. This was not included Long Bình Depot which was locked by US before withdrawing.
1974's Battle of Paracels was a test to see whether US had completely abandoned South Vietnam or not.
When people talk about the U.S. losing in Vietnam, you have to add caveats. Winning & losing in a guerilla war is not really defined. We won every engagement but could not eradicate the Cong. Like saying the police lost because there is still crime. We could not kill every one. Country was in decent shape when we left and it fell 2 years later, partly because ARVN didn't want to fight and also Congress cut off aid, country was sick of the war, and no air support.
We will dedicate an entire episode to that topic soon
North Vietnam and a South Vietnam before the war.....after the war......One Vietnam= US Lost
@@chash4568 I agree. But I would specify in that case the US lost strategically and politically. Not militarily because the US are already left and having achieved the military goal of being there in the first place, which was to preserve South Vietnam from being taken over by the invading North. After American military forces left, it become a possible political loss or long-term political strategic victory. Do you get my perspective?
@@robertortiz-wilson1588US achieved nothing but utter defeat. Vietnam is always one nation ever since it's foundation and US failed to change that
@angkhoanguyen6114 Your people did do the job of suppressing the Champa peope who had been there as well, I'll give you that. Also, Vietnam used to be bigger. This can even be seen through maps looking at ethnicity with countries bordering Vietnam. Not as united and one as you would claim then, hmm?
Under Nixon, the US and SV had the war pretty much won around 1971-72. The VC was decimated and NV regulars were forced to use conventional attacks which seldom worked. Nixon had to withdrawal US forces because of domestic political pressures. Unfortunate because SV could have been saved and likely have become another South Korea success story.
Democrat Congress refused to fund SV rearmament, thus NV won.
When someone says "Democrat" instead of Democratic, you know they get their facts from the right wing echo chamber. Anyway you should go to Vietnam someday, it's a country that's doing pretty well for itself. You will also find that Americans are quite welcome.
Won😂
The cost to maintain the war became a major burden to even the Strongest Superpower in the World. U have any idea about how much money poured into SV...?
The war became unstainable by that point.
US resolve also eroded too much by that point.
And NVA lost a lot of men and materiel but they would recover to fight again several years later. Is that a lasting victory?
That war was not nearly won by 71-72. It was arguably lost way before then. The Republic of South Vietnam was built on corruption and deadly coups, and the ARVN was ineffective. All the money the US poured in did nothing to create an effective fighting army with high morale. Every politician knew this by 1968.
That and Kissinger's terrible deal with the Communist Vietnamese delegation in Paris exposed the funding for the Vietnamese Republic military that was formerly under the budget appropriations of each of our Armed Forces military branch to dangerous political meddling by the Democrats and the OG RINO's under Ted Kennedy.
@@shatterquartz It was the Democrat controlled Congress. What are you babbling about? They are the ones who prevented President Ford from even sending air support. Not boots on the ground, just air support.
Vietnam got lucky. After their invasion of their former ally in Cambodia who they helped bring the power after the USA left, they were isolated from much of both the capitalist world and the communist world. Their General secretary oversaw too many economic and farm collectivization policy failures, and finally got booted. The one party state communist regime then adopted liberal market reforms and introduced limited capitalism by the 1980s to save themselves. South Vietnam could’ve been another South Korean level success story however. They have already done privatized land reform redistribution just before they were conquered.
Vietnam is friendly with America because China keeps eyeing them for another possible round if they get too much on their nerves.
6:57 sounds so eerily similar to Afghanistan
There is nothing to "win" there...
We lost, fair and square. Sometimes its better to just admit defeat and move on.
No we lost because of pro-Communists within the Federal government and the MSM it's time we acknowledge that fact.
@@markgarrett3647true, but it was still an unwinable war from the get go.
@@user-td2jw9ze2c Unwinnable only in the minds of pro-Communists like Walter Cronkite and John Kerry.
I'm not gonna let some crybaby on the internet's opinion stop me from talking about history lmao. Idc what you think should be moved on from. You're irrelevant in a discussion if you don't want any part of it.
*Why the US Lost Vietnam
Gi..discover Pattaya beach... when he get holiday..and now Pattaya is famous beach in the world.
They left because they lost. Period. Got their asses kicked.
the *ARVN you meant?
@@grdfhrghrggrtwqqu The French and the Americans both got beaten bloody.
@@theheadshot45 JFK and arvn are to blame
What is the kd then. Usa 50k to North Vietnam 1 million lol@@theheadshot45
@@ShubhamMishrabro USA didn't fight alone. What about kd of South Korea, South Vietnam, Australia, Philippines, Thailand...
The US left because they were getting fought lol
score board
Left/loss same thing?
Left Vietnam? Lolz. Battered and ejected more like.
Ejected by who? Not North Vietnam.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 Who else?
Please list the battles in which the North Vietnamese Army took land that was occupied at the time it was taken, by United States military forces.@@samcook159
Northt Vietnam won the war. That is unarguable. What is also unarguable Is that they never managed to string together any series of even moderate military successes against US forces. They fought a strategic strategy to success and should be respected for that. They were a competent and determined enemy that achieved all the political goals their political leadership desired. But they did not directly defeat the United States military in any major battle.
When fighting an insurgency, you have to have a complete plan and strategy. All the insurgents have to do is not lose. They only have to survive. PAVN and VC lost about 1 million KIA. America lost far fewer (58,220) even counting about 200,000 RVA. If you think the VC and North beat the US in fighting, then you don't understand why Saigon fell.