Comments by "" (@Josh93B93) on "The Infographics Show"
channel.
-
@GuardTheSound But the US did have a Goal, to stop the spead of Communism in Southeast Asia so to maintain its ecconomic and stategic intrest in the region, this goal was not attained. Every time the US supported a coup, it inflamed the populace against american occupation, every time a village was torched by American bombers, it enraged the populace both north and south of the demarcation line, the only time American assistance was wanted was in order to remove the Japanese invaders, beliving if they helped the US, they would gain independence, but after the war the US agreed to left france to retake colonial dominion of Indochina, in doing so becoming the Imperialist and losing the battle for "hearts and minds" long befor the Gulf on Tonkin incident ever happened. Meanwhile the Communist were the only ones promising a Vietnam for the Vietnamese people, the ones who had been fighting occupirers of the country for over 2 decades, the Americans could never hope to win the battle for popular support as they were 20 years too late and backing the wrong side, so en the end the US could have killed a million more, it still would have only further inflamed the region, and turned more people against its military occupation, which is why the US did not win the conflict, by body count, strategically, or in any other form, because to do so would have required genocide on levels the american public could not stomach and on which the US Government could not justify as it would have completely destroyed any ecconomic interest being fought over as well as make known that the lives and well being of the Vietnamese people were never in America's intrest, and that would cost the US more in terms of world relations than Stalin ever worried about losing over gulaging some kulaks, So the US "could" have one the war, but to do so would expose it as an undemocratic, non law abiding rouge state with an imperialist bend, face international sanctions if not intervention, a much worse recession in the 1970's, most if not all of you allies, (spare Israel, South Africa, and oooh you'd get a scorched hole called South Vietnam....yet at the UN the rest of the world would have seen it touting American Victory over Vietnam the same way it viewed Italy's Victory over Etheopia.
So the US had but three options "lose" ahh we know they could admit that, so there was "win", but that outcome would have only led to a greater defeat on the international scale, or option three "just fuckin leave"
America's foriegn policy is like a spoiled child playing a board game, if the child cant win he just wants to kick the board and run away. A prosess that has only continued since the end of Indochina Conflict.
5
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@zingerman11259 Ok, so the the Americans left, that being said, outcome of the Indochina conflict was that the NVA won a series of strategic victories against the forces of South Vietnam as they could not hold out while lacking direct American support, which could not continue for reasons stated previously. Why was the US involved in Vietnam, if we look at the simple context, "to stop the spread of Communism", it clearly failed that objective when it abandoned it's ally to fight the Communist alone. Long before American withdrawal they had failed in thier interest of bringing peace and ecconomic prosperity to the people of South Vietnam by supporting a line of corrupt and murderous dictors through military coups (kinda like Korea) that were carried out with the explicit approval of the central intellegence agency. So in terms of the Cold War, Vietnam was a loss for the US, SEATO, and the West in general.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1