[quote]Vo Nguyen Giap, the Vietnamese general who masterminded victories against France and the US, has died aged 102.
His defeat of French forces at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 effectively ended French colonial rule in the region.
He was North Vietnam's defence minister at the time of the Tet Offensive against American forces in 1968, often cited as a key campaign that led to the Americans' withdrawal.
Gen Giap also published a number of works on military strategy.
He was born into a peasant family in the central Quang Binh province of what was then French Indochina.
After his role in the war against the French, Gen Giap was credited for his leadership at the time of the 1968 Tet Offensive against US forces.
Troops ultimately under his command attacked more than 40 provincial capitals and entered Saigon, then the capital of South Vietnam, briefly capturing the US embassy. But he was not personally involved in the operation, as he was in Budapest at the time.[/quote]
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24402278[/url]
[video=youtube;ec0XKhAHR5I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec0XKhAHR5I[/video]
102 holy shit
old as balls
He is literally the modern day Caesar. He beat both the fucking French and the USA-Australia-New Zealand.
[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;42409827]He is literally the modern day Caesar. He beat both the fucking French and the USA-Australia-New Zealand.[/QUOTE]
Please revisit the history of Vietnam.
Just a tip for anyone in this thread; The United States did not "lose" the war in Vietnam. We forced the North into signing a peace treaty which [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords"]created a situation like Korea has today.[/URL] This did not last long as Nixon had his scandal, the North broke the treaty and attacked, and then "United States Congress (controlled by the Democratic Party) refused to appropriate the funds needed by the South Vietnamese, who collapsed completely."
The Victories they are referring to are individual battles not the war. I don't really see a connection to Caesar either since Vietnam and Rome are on a different scale.
That's called "lost the war".
[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;42409827]He is literally the modern day Caesar. He beat both the fucking French and the USA-Australia-New Zealand.[/QUOTE]
Do you even know who Caesar is?
[QUOTE=spiritlol;42410468]Please revisit the history of Vietnam.
Just a tip for anyone in this thread; The United States did not "lose" the war in Vietnam. We forced the North into signing a peace treaty which [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords"]created a situation like Korea has today.[/URL] This did not last long as Nixon had his scandal, the North broke the treaty and attacked, and then "United States Congress (controlled by the Democratic Party) refused to appropriate the funds needed by the South Vietnamese, who collapsed completely."
The Victories they are referring to are individual battles not the war. I don't really see a connection to Caesar either since Vietnam and Rome are on a different scale.[/QUOTE]
The US still lost.
[QUOTE=spiritlol;42410468]Please revisit the history of Vietnam.
Just a tip for anyone in this thread; The United States did not "lose" the war in Vietnam. We forced the North into signing a peace treaty which [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords"]created a situation like Korea has today.[/URL] This did not last long as Nixon had his scandal, the North broke the treaty and attacked, and then "United States Congress (controlled by the Democratic Party) refused to appropriate the funds needed by the South Vietnamese, who collapsed completely."
The Victories they are referring to are individual battles not the war. I don't really see a connection to Caesar either since Vietnam and Rome are on a different scale.[/QUOTE]
The difference is that South Korea still exists
To be honest, I had no idea Giap was even still alive up to this point.
Nothing much has progressed in Vietnam, I went to Hanoi earlier this year and it's a shit hole.
[QUOTE=spiritlol;42410468]Please revisit the history of Vietnam.
Just a tip for anyone in this thread; The United States did not "lose" the war in Vietnam. We forced the North into signing a peace treaty which [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords"]created a situation like Korea has today.[/URL] This did not last long as Nixon had his scandal, the North broke the treaty and attacked, and then "United States Congress (controlled by the Democratic Party) refused to appropriate the funds needed by the South Vietnamese, who collapsed completely."
The Victories they are referring to are individual battles not the war. I don't really see a connection to Caesar either since Vietnam and Rome are on a different scale.[/QUOTE]
The U.S. still lost because the goal was to contain communism, which clearly was not accomplished. It's not like there was some catastrophic military defeat, but it was still a loss.
US lost because of political reasons, and IIRC, Vo Nguyen actually stated that if the United States had moved north, North Vietnam would of lost.
All in all though, Vietnam and the United States are tending to old wounds, and we are actually becoming good buddies.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;42411427]US lost because of political reasons, and IIRC, Vo Nguyen actually stated that if the United States had moved north, North Vietnam would of lost.
All in all though, Vietnam and the United States are tending to old wounds, and we are actually becoming good buddies.[/QUOTE]
US eating so much they get fat, while Vietnam lives mostly in poverty
Yup good buddies
[QUOTE=spiritlol;42410468]Please revisit the history of Vietnam.
Just a tip for anyone in this thread; The United States did not "lose" the war in Vietnam. We forced the North into signing a peace treaty which [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords"]created a situation like Korea has today.[/URL] This did not last long as Nixon had his scandal, the North broke the treaty and attacked, and then "United States Congress (controlled by the Democratic Party) refused to appropriate the funds needed by the South Vietnamese, who collapsed completely."
The Victories they are referring to are individual battles not the war. I don't really see a connection to Caesar either since Vietnam and Rome are on a different scale.[/QUOTE]
Troll?
[QUOTE] US lost because of political reasons, and IIRC, Vo Nguyen actually stated that if the United States had moved north, North Vietnam would of lost.[/QUOTE]
Are you about that? The guerillas would've hopped over both the Chinese and Cambodian borders (not that the U.S. actually stayed out of Cambodia) to resupply etc.
The best way to win was to use/train the native montagnards, which the U.S/Australians did. But the Vietnamese government decided to disarm them so they couldn't rise up and stop the Low-land Vietnamese from doing land development in the hills (deforestation and the forced removal of the montagnards) The Montagnards were very effective, up until the South Vietnamese government stopped the program and managed to piss off the montagnards, consequently they defected to North.
[QUOTE=spiritlol;42410468]Please revisit the history of Vietnam.
Just a tip for anyone in this thread; The United States did not "lose" the war in Vietnam. We forced the North into signing a peace treaty which [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords"]created a situation like Korea has today.[/URL] This did not last long as Nixon had his scandal, the North broke the treaty and attacked, and then "United States Congress (controlled by the Democratic Party) refused to appropriate the funds needed by the South Vietnamese, who collapsed completely."
The Victories they are referring to are individual battles not the war. I don't really see a connection to Caesar either since Vietnam and Rome are on a different scale.[/QUOTE]
For a country like that going against a super power that is called a win. Just like how the American Revolution was a win for us.
Also remember that North Vietnam had the military and financial backing of Russia, China, Cuba, and North Korea at the time. So it's obviously no surprise why we had such a difficult time. Almost like we were fighting 4 different communist countries at once.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;42411427]US lost because of political reasons, and IIRC, Vo Nguyen actually stated that if the United States had moved north, North Vietnam would of lost.
[/QUOTE]
The popular American attitude to Vietnam is just silly. You would not have won, they beat the Khmer empire on multiple occasions, they beat the Mongolian invasion, they beat the French, and they (understandably) beat America.
Get over yourself, the US wouldn't have been able to win in any practical or feasible scenario. They've bene pulling the same war strategies on people for thousands of years and it's worked every time.
[QUOTE=DaysBefore;42410839]Do you even know who Caesar is?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, at one point a rogue general with a couple legions who beat the entire roman republic.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;42412533]The popular American attitude to Vietnam is just silly. You would not have won, they beat the Khmer empire on multiple occasions, they beat the Mongolian invasion, they beat the French, and they (understandably) beat America.[/QUOTE]
They won against the French because the French were completely fucking incompetent.
Digging trenches and waiting for them to march into your machine guns? Rofl
Few men can claim what he could. ;_;7
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;42412763]
Digging trenches and waiting for them to march into your machine guns? Rofl[/QUOTE]
Going into the Vietname jungles is always a bad strategy.
He's training cadres with Ho Chi Minh in communist heaven now :'-)
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;42413685]He's training cadres with Ho Chi Minh in communist heaven now :'-)[/QUOTE]
Communist Heaven is a thing?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;42413970]Communist Heaven is a thing?[/QUOTE]
i thought communists were supposed to be athiest.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;42411427]US lost because of political reasons, and IIRC, Vo Nguyen actually stated that if the United States had moved north, North Vietnam would of lost.
All in all though, Vietnam and the United States are tending to old wounds, and we are actually becoming good buddies.[/QUOTE]
well yea we could have won if we hadn't ordered american soldiers to burn vietnamese villagers alive with fucking napalm and flamethrowers to swing public opinion against the war.
[editline]5th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=SexualShark;42413983]i though communists were supposed to be athiest.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism[/url]
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Christian_communism_logo.svg/397px-Christian_communism_logo.svg.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42414005]well yea we could have won if we hadn't ordered american soldiers to burn vietnamese villagers alive with fucking napalm and flamethrowers to swing public opinion against the war.
[/QUOTE]
The torches of freedom and enlightenment.
Conscription and camera's didn't help either. If nobody saw it there wouldn't have been any problems.
Nothing short of burning down every village and reducing the jungles to ash would have gotten an American victory. The North Vietnamese were ideologically homogenous, they wanted to win, they were 100% committed to waging total war, and their soldiers and insurgents were basically trapping, entrenching and ambushing on every inch of forest-covered soil.
That's not a war that you can win unless you're hell-bent on wiping out the entire population.
Invading North Vietnam would have been an even better way for the US and South Vietnamese to lose the war. The South Vietnamese had a tenuous grip on the south at best and made no friends forcing villagers into consolidated 'protected' villages so they could monitor them. I can only imagine if they had done the same in the North it would have been the fast track to an unwinnable, widespread guerrilla war where the already poor spread of force was stretched even thinner.
[editline]5th October 2013[/editline]
Plus it would have sent the US economy into the shitter if they had to continually pump money and manpower into the war longer than they did.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
