Vietnamese...I do not understand why you people say that China will lose against you in a fight, when your very ideals and strategies are mostly influenced by Sun Tzu and Guerilla Warfare.
as time go by population increase life b com harder ppl will have nothing to loose they will rise up and overthorw the vc just like in libia egypt siryia communist rule will end in less than 1 hundred yr uknow usa& french still piss about this they will help us for free we ll kick ur ass i gaureanteed long live vit kmt
A lot of credible military campaigns using Sun Tzu has been left out by this documentary. The Germans did splendidly well, even far better than what the United States can ever do, with their blitzkrieg attacks all over Europe.
The only war the US used Sun Tzu maxims the most was the war of Independence. Apart from that, sheer reliance on technology and military industrial output was the main factor of victory.
I don't understand why they would use Vietnam as an example. Perhaps Nguyen Vo Giap was a practioner of Sun Tzu and he did it pretty well.
But I feel Napoleon deserves mentioning with his Austerlitz campaign. It was a masterstroke with Sun Tzu's maxims being utilized to it fullest extent, whilst Napoleon adding his own tinge of improvisation with reverse psychology.
You can't blame the US forces, they weren't trained for jungle warfare. Perhaps only Rambo was.
Apart from that the Vietcong are incredibly cunning. I still do not think any nation in the world dares to fight Vietnam in their own soil. Not even neighbouring China. Any country that goes in will get stuck in a quagmire and the leadership will die a political death. Like LBJ's administration.
@ConstantineJoseph I beg your pardon. And what makes you believe the US didn't know how to fight in the jungles or a guerilla war. The VC were no more cunning than the US was. The US military fought very well during the war, it was the restrictions and numerous political sanctuaries and political management of the war that determined the outcome. Not the military.
@gerry301 No doubt about the United States military's capability. However, with the lessons learnt from the Vietnam war, I do not doubt that the US cannot cope in a Vietnam setting again, having gained that experience. However, in comparison to the resilience and the native environment of a Vietnamese defender, one might want to pay extra attention to their kind of warfare. They are one of the toughest in the world.
@ConstantineJoseph No doubt the NVA and VC were brave fighte4rs and were well trained, equiped and fought well. Having said that the US strategy at the time was attrition and after the TET offensive of 1968 the NVA were having a hard time filling their ranks. Their strategy was to stay in the war until the US got tired and went home. So they could withdraw from the battle field until they had enough troops to start again. Border restrictions made it difficult followup.
@orangebiggy Fought head to head? Or do you mean finding the enemy fixing him in place and destroying him. I guess thats head to head. As far as hiding from the US that wasn't so easy for the VC or NVA as the US had numerous LRPs, LRRPS, SF, SEALs, etc. everywhere the VC or NVA were suspected. Numerous ambushes, prisoner snatches, sightings were called in for artillory bombardment or aircraft.
Stupid series, although sun tzu is teh awsum. Im pretty annoyed they present chess as the ""stupid strategy" of trying to capture pieces. Anyone that knows chess knows its more than that.
Topics: HOW TO HAVE NO FEAR AND NO SADNESS IN THE BATTLE ZONE AND PREVENT GOING HOME INSANE, Terrorism, War, Military Administration, Law, Politics, Science, Debated Issues, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
SPREAD THIS BOOK AND CONQUER THE SPREADING EVIL BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - FOR FREEDOM AND PEACE.
The grunts on the ground in Vietnam did not want to be there. They were drafted and most of them did not want to die in a foreign country. Most of those soldiers were happy to leave Vietnam behind. Besides that, it's always politicians that start and end wars, never the military. Don't blame the politicians for ending the war, blame them for starting it.
this is why the Art of war is my second bible and i study things like vietnam only by studying our greatest defeats can we hope to pathe the way for our greatest victories
The North Vietnamese and Vietcong were a very determined enemy they wanted the U.S out of their country and they were more than willing to sacrifice their lives for that goal.
If you dropped an A-Bomb then it would be U.S.A. against the whole world instead of U.S.A. against North Vietnam due to an agreement at the end of World War 2 that bans the use of nuclear deterrents, but, in the case of being threatened by a country that is using nuclear weapons against another they can counter strike the other country using nuclear weapons too.
Vietnam was an impossible war to win. The US shouldn't have gone in. Nearly all of the Vietnamese supported the Vietcong and due to Vietcong tactics even more neutral vietnamese were militarised. You can't defeat a widespread popular ideology with a military.
Unfortunatly the west still havent learnt the lesson since now we're trying to defeat terrorism.
America suffered around 362,000 casualties during Vietnam. I'm aware numbers don't really mean much in war, but imagine the shock effect of seeing your buddies taken into body bags or on the operating table. In fact, a lot of the US troops were WIA than KIA or MIA.
The ideas of a Chinese who died hundreds of years ago overcame the difference between the US and Vietnam armies. Talk about ahead of time. I mean seriously, this guy is badass and he didn't even need to physically do anything.
@supremefireplace len gay read my post very very good get a translator, or go back to school i said if the american used that systeem of that fucking chinees => than we know that the systeem doensnt work so i gonna say it sow AMERICAN LOST THE BATTLE AT Vietnam-Afganistan-Iraq-Somali-some African countries-.... fucking americans
@emmthreejonny Dude... who cares, the U.S. lost tons on engagement... to say otherwise means you're as stupid as this dumb fuck lying to himself. Notice he didn't the U.S. lost no engagements, he said WE! He's an author, not a soldier. Ha ha ha....
@LosAngelesWeedSmoker Read books... ha ha ha. What a supreme dummy you are referring me to outdated books. Bet you $1,000,000.00 I can pull a book out from a Viet author who wrote in detail of how the U.S. lost some battles. Dude... it's fucking war, sick shit happened on both sides. Notice he said 'WE' and not the "U.S.". You believe propaganda from a turd book writer who was never deployed thus just a troll trying to make cash. Just look at Afghanistan, RAPE!
What does Master Sun Tzu say about using Fire in warfare....now you know why the napalm was used as it was.
America studied the military book, in basic training for officers, it is the OLDEST MILITARY TREATIES IN THE WORLD FFS, do you think Americans are dumb to avoid it in fundamental military education?
@runisunke What he meant is that they beat the Viet Cong in battles. In these engagements, the Viet Congs choose to withdraw in the end. It is sort of victory for American soldiers. The Viet Cong are avoiding a direct confrontation, prefering small scale ambushes.
Did you even watch this? Westmoreland tried, and lost. And what was the most important aspect Sun Tzu mentions in his "Art of War"? Right. Humanity. Lose that, and lose the war on the homefront in no time.
Sure, we tried to kill people and had some success with that, but we refused to advance even an inch into N. Vietnam.
Imagine trying to win the US Civil War without ever stepping across the Madison-Dixon Line. It'd be an impossible feat.
No one has ever won a war without stepping into enemy territory. You have to give someone the impression that defeat is inevitable in order to truly achieve victory. With Vietnam, we made their guerrilla tactics a viable strategy.
@SgtHydra 'Killing everyone' isn't a viable stratergy in modern warfare.
1. Governments have to worry about the electorates view. They need the public to support their war.
2. There's a much larger international aspect. If a country starts violating what are seen as human rights they will be put under pressure to stop the war. In Vietnam the US had to fight a limited war so as to make sure the USSR and Chinese didnt become directly involved. Thats why they enver used nukes or invaded N Vietnam
@SgtHydra Clearly you have no grip on reality. SO you think it would be a good idea for US to nuke Vietnam, then millions of CHinese soldiers will flood down into SE Asia and you can forget the domino theory because all that shit is turning red, THailand, INdia, Philipines. Oh and lets not forget the USSR, they're going to retaliate with there own nuclear arsenol. MAD, mutually assured distruction e.g we're all dead.
In modern warfare you can't go all out dumbass, the US knew this.
This is completely bullshit, the Vietcong had no control on the influence of the American people. These speakers all talk like the American people are a bunch of robots who should listen to everything the government tells them to. Lol sounds like they view the American people as nothing more than Propaganda. The reason why the people of America downplayed the war was not because of Vietcong influence. It was because the reasons for America to fight the war were stupid and brain washing tactics.
@Sun6Tzu You said: The reason why the people of America downplayed the war was not because of Vietcong influence
how is that not so? Is it not the vietcong that kept inflicting casualties to us and kept sending U.S soldiers home in coffins? (lets not get into vietcong casualties...we are talking about this question) AND is it not the U.S media...that displayed the horrors of war and the impact of the tet offensive have on us?
@xCookieBabi60616 What happened in Vietnam, stayed in Vietnam. What happened in US, such as the people opposing the war, stayed only on US soil. The fact was the US government had to report it's own dead casualties sooner or later. They tried gift wrapping it by always reporting along more enemy KIA. They figured out a solution to this with these new wars in the middle east. They let PMC's do most of the dangerous work where casualties are higher, less official military deaths. Less reports.
@Sun6Tzu You said: The fact was the US government had to report it's own dead casualties sooner or later.
How long is sooner or later...and then how can we trust it? Is it reasonable to think we lost 58k troops in just 10 years? I for one don't think so, especially with all those snipers and booby traps nonstop. I'm talking about ten years here and we only lost 58k?
Yes, but what PMCs were in vietnam? I know blackwater didn't exist back then.
@Iraqendwar The Iraq war holds the most PMC's used by western forces. PMC's are the 2nd largest armed force, after the US military. PMC's hold a larger presence than even the UK military.
@Iraqendwar Don't forget there were about 320,000 South Vietnamese deaths during that time. The US was very prompt at notification of military troops with the exception of MIAs or POWs. The private military groups used during the was were Thai mercenaries, as well as Hmongs, Nungs, and Cambodians. They were trained and often used by US SF troops in Laos and Cambodia, as well as in Vietnam. Some actually worked in north Vietnam.
@Sun6Tzu Never heard that before. And what about Jane Fonda in Hanoi? PMCs are usually used for personal protection of Iraqi or Afgan ministers and higher ups as well as other important people or agencies or for protection of critical facilities. Have never heard of them being used in battle or in "more dangerous" situations to keep military deaths down. I believe the death of the four contractors in Fallujha are included in the total number of deaths in Iraq. Any others you can name?
I'm sure that as an American, I should not say anything positive about the North Vietnamese Army, but Giap is as good a military leader as the world has ever seen. He fought off two, count 'em, two major military powers...France and America. If he had been on our side, we would have built statues of him and named schools in his honor.
@onee You said: Sun Tzu sounds like a genius, but....... what if both sides uses the tactics of Sun Tzu. What would you need to do then to win that war.
Then whoever uses Sun Tzu's tactics the best wins. Good question though good question ;)
What has sun tzu to do with everything ? Everytime talk about the Vietnam war starts everybody is in awe how the midget beat the giant. What most people conveniently forget is, that the us knew where the leadership was, they could have just taken North Vietnam, but they have chosen not to, to avoid risking a larger conflict with China.
Yes many people forget the fact that US did not invade north vietnam with ground troops. They only bombed it. They did not want to invade there and provoke china and soviet union.
If they had invaded north vietnam, the war may have been over for the commnuists.
But the north vietnamese fought a tough, clever war nevertheless.
You say: "The U.S tried to avoid China in the war"??? LOL What a laugh! You know what, in 1972, China and U.S.A officially become allies, how come U.S.A still didn't send troops to attack North Vietnam?? What an idiot!
and that is exactly why civilians are now capable of losing wars. allow me to explain: ever wonder why a country in which the U.S. was involved with for 25 years only lost 58,000 men? because the aim of guerilla warfare is political and not strictly military. it does kill people but it wants others to see who is killed. because most civilians dont like violence, it appals them. therefore making them want to end the war no matter what it takes. it convinces the civilian to say "this isnt worth it
now this is why the vietam war didnt turn out as well as it could have. the U.S. didnt lose in vietnam per se. war for the U.S. had simply enterd a different arena. we must now understand that when a war is fought that it is possible for both sides to achieve some political goal: for vietnam they achieved independance, for the U.S. communism went no further than vietnam. according to documentation from the National Security Council of that time: victory or defeat are irrelevant in vietnam.
The legendary of Ho Chi Minh is historical and dynamic and equally say for the great general Vo Nguyen Giap. It's sad to say but general Giap is aging rapidly and soon he will depart from this world and Vietnam will plung to deep sorrow and sadness where Vietnamese once did when Ho Chi Minh deceased more than 40 yrs ago. My wishes to general Giap for great health and longevity.
@LegendaryVNese even tho i hate him, giap... because he was a vietnamese commie and his people fought against my people.. i still have respects for my enemies
@JohnAgent24 Its not that the will was not there. Nam vets had it. Theirs were
to survive the bs vet war and come out in one piece. Vet war benefited no americans but to fuel the political goals of the government. It was good that the american ppl saw through the bs and forced their hand.
Just as Viet Nam war was a failure, current Iraq is the same.
This has been flagged as spam show
Vietnamese...I do not understand why you people say that China will lose against you in a fight, when your very ideals and strategies are mostly influenced by Sun Tzu and Guerilla Warfare.
timothychong48 1 week ago
as time go by population increase life b com harder ppl will have nothing to loose they will rise up and overthorw the vc just like in libia egypt siryia communist rule will end in less than 1 hundred yr uknow usa& french still piss about this they will help us for free we ll kick ur ass i gaureanteed long live vit kmt
limwang75 2 weeks ago
if only the US sent Chuck Norris history would have been reversed
leklek69 1 month ago
@leklek69 For the record, Chuck Norris's brother died in Vietnam.
gerry301 1 month ago
@gerry301 but he aint chuck norris. only chuck norris has the power to reverse history
leklek69 1 month ago
what's the title of this documentary?
PinoyBboy1992 2 months ago
A lot of credible military campaigns using Sun Tzu has been left out by this documentary. The Germans did splendidly well, even far better than what the United States can ever do, with their blitzkrieg attacks all over Europe.
The only war the US used Sun Tzu maxims the most was the war of Independence. Apart from that, sheer reliance on technology and military industrial output was the main factor of victory.
Strategically, some nations performed better.
ConstantineJoseph 3 months ago
I don't understand why they would use Vietnam as an example. Perhaps Nguyen Vo Giap was a practioner of Sun Tzu and he did it pretty well.
But I feel Napoleon deserves mentioning with his Austerlitz campaign. It was a masterstroke with Sun Tzu's maxims being utilized to it fullest extent, whilst Napoleon adding his own tinge of improvisation with reverse psychology.
ConstantineJoseph 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph I think it was the way that soldiers fought back then. Standing head to head rather the vietcong's way of using the surroundings.
orangebiggy 2 months ago
@orangebiggy
You can't blame the US forces, they weren't trained for jungle warfare. Perhaps only Rambo was.
Apart from that the Vietcong are incredibly cunning. I still do not think any nation in the world dares to fight Vietnam in their own soil. Not even neighbouring China. Any country that goes in will get stuck in a quagmire and the leadership will die a political death. Like LBJ's administration.
ConstantineJoseph 2 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph I beg your pardon. And what makes you believe the US didn't know how to fight in the jungles or a guerilla war. The VC were no more cunning than the US was. The US military fought very well during the war, it was the restrictions and numerous political sanctuaries and political management of the war that determined the outcome. Not the military.
gerry301 1 month ago
@gerry301 No doubt about the United States military's capability. However, with the lessons learnt from the Vietnam war, I do not doubt that the US cannot cope in a Vietnam setting again, having gained that experience. However, in comparison to the resilience and the native environment of a Vietnamese defender, one might want to pay extra attention to their kind of warfare. They are one of the toughest in the world.
ConstantineJoseph 1 month ago
@ConstantineJoseph No doubt the NVA and VC were brave fighte4rs and were well trained, equiped and fought well. Having said that the US strategy at the time was attrition and after the TET offensive of 1968 the NVA were having a hard time filling their ranks. Their strategy was to stay in the war until the US got tired and went home. So they could withdraw from the battle field until they had enough troops to start again. Border restrictions made it difficult followup.
gerry301 1 month ago
@orangebiggy Fought head to head? Or do you mean finding the enemy fixing him in place and destroying him. I guess thats head to head. As far as hiding from the US that wasn't so easy for the VC or NVA as the US had numerous LRPs, LRRPS, SF, SEALs, etc. everywhere the VC or NVA were suspected. Numerous ambushes, prisoner snatches, sightings were called in for artillory bombardment or aircraft.
gerry301 1 month ago
@gerry301 The other guy was talking about the Revolutionary War, there was no artillery (unless you count the cannons) and aircraft back then.
orangebiggy 1 month ago
@orangebiggy OK, I'll buy that. Thank you.
gerry301 1 month ago
Võ Nguyên Giáp
Võ = Kungfu
Nguyên = full, whole
Giáp = armor
No wonder why he is one of the greatest general of our country.
Happy 100th Birthday General!
GDQT 5 months ago
Stupid series, although sun tzu is teh awsum. Im pretty annoyed they present chess as the ""stupid strategy" of trying to capture pieces. Anyone that knows chess knows its more than that.
FlamingLion116 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: HOW TO HAVE NO FEAR AND NO SADNESS IN THE BATTLE ZONE AND PREVENT GOING HOME INSANE, Terrorism, War, Military Administration, Law, Politics, Science, Debated Issues, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
SPREAD THIS BOOK AND CONQUER THE SPREADING EVIL BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - FOR FREEDOM AND PEACE.
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
HAPPY 100th BIRTHDAY VO GIAP
Pikazilla 6 months ago
The United States Military did not loose the war in Viet Nam. The liberal, pro communist democrats in the U.S. house and senate did.
sidewindermack 7 months ago
@sidewindermack
The grunts on the ground in Vietnam did not want to be there. They were drafted and most of them did not want to die in a foreign country. Most of those soldiers were happy to leave Vietnam behind. Besides that, it's always politicians that start and end wars, never the military. Don't blame the politicians for ending the war, blame them for starting it.
Troublesome2008 7 months ago
This video is a clear B.S
KatiushaVN4 7 months ago
Vo Nguyen Giap once said that if he had followed Sun Tzu's statics, he could have lost the war against French troops in 1954
KatiushaVN4 7 months ago
When you rule out the possibility of invading the enemy, they cannot lose. When they cannot lose, you cannot win. Simple as that.
vk45de 7 months ago
Sun Tzu said that.
ZeroZ30o 8 months ago
Great, great work! Also if you have time, check out 'the mind of a leader animation series: the art of war'. It's cool.
MrStrategicmarketing 8 months ago
6:29 this says it all...
6amsunrise 8 months ago
"What do you call a Vietnamese person? A VC.
What do you call a Vietnamese person that stays still with its hands up? A well disceplined VC."
~Helicopter gunner from Fullmetal Jacket
combuf 8 months ago
nothing good about viet cong viet cong are coward in my eyes!!!
HungKiet 9 months ago
this is why the Art of war is my second bible and i study things like vietnam only by studying our greatest defeats can we hope to pathe the way for our greatest victories
xxGhostXIIIxx 9 months ago
The North Vietnamese and Vietcong were a very determined enemy they wanted the U.S out of their country and they were more than willing to sacrifice their lives for that goal.
Villeroi8 9 months ago
Visually this documentary looks amazing.
emmthreejonny 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
our army is the strongest but our will is the weakest- THAT IS TRUE!
businesseast 10 months ago
Giap is the VN's general first name, call him Vo
kl2991 10 months ago
What impressed me the most is most VC sniper using WW2 SKS rifle without scope but they still can kill the Yanks!!
hck112 10 months ago
@hck112 Yep, we should have just dropped the atomic bomb, or stayed out of the war altogether.
faveology 10 months ago
If you dropped an A-Bomb then it would be U.S.A. against the whole world instead of U.S.A. against North Vietnam due to an agreement at the end of World War 2 that bans the use of nuclear deterrents, but, in the case of being threatened by a country that is using nuclear weapons against another they can counter strike the other country using nuclear weapons too.
rapcorerocks 9 months ago
The IDF studied Sun Tzu tactics in Six Days War and to deal with the Arabs.
hck112 10 months ago
WOOT ancient chinese strategies ftw!!
timsss128 1 year ago
There are reasons we Americans lost.
Leader-the commander=you and your opponent
Heaven-(weather and economy
Earth-Geography(rivers, roads, surroundings, etc.)
The moral law+method and dicipline. (organization, supplies, controll, etc.)
These all play key parts in every battle/war.
America tied in leadership.
Lacked in heaven and earth(didnt know the land as well)
The enemy had more dicapline and moral than us. And were greater supplied.
We lost due to these things. Think about it.
MGAFTERSHOCK41 1 year ago
Vietnam was an impossible war to win. The US shouldn't have gone in. Nearly all of the Vietnamese supported the Vietcong and due to Vietcong tactics even more neutral vietnamese were militarised. You can't defeat a widespread popular ideology with a military.
Unfortunatly the west still havent learnt the lesson since now we're trying to defeat terrorism.
00JakeR00 1 year ago
Well, they had knowledge of the Land in their favor.
Raven236 1 year ago
America suffered around 362,000 casualties during Vietnam. I'm aware numbers don't really mean much in war, but imagine the shock effect of seeing your buddies taken into body bags or on the operating table. In fact, a lot of the US troops were WIA than KIA or MIA.
CosmoShidan 1 year ago
ah crap , i loved the intro .... awsome music !
sucks that those guys started talking ....
You all a bunch of slaves !!!
sexyxrs 1 year ago
And now Vietnam is Capitalist... we were just ahead of our time.
dizzyarmstrong 1 year ago
Nam baby,Nam
KRAUSER0130 1 year ago
The ideas of a Chinese who died hundreds of years ago overcame the difference between the US and Vietnam armies. Talk about ahead of time. I mean seriously, this guy is badass and he didn't even need to physically do anything.
DynamicZer0 1 year ago
@DynamicZer0 try thousands of years.
supremefireplace 1 year ago
USA got their asses handed to them! Sun Tzu rules!
CosmoShidan 1 year ago
I laughed so hard when the american when he sprayed his lmg :)
69Timmeh69 1 year ago
Unless it's a farm.
GanonTheOctorok 1 year ago
so if the americans used that tacktics we know than that sun tsu chinchong is not working
they have fucking lost the war like in agfanistan and Iraq
CommanderSyler 1 year ago
@CommanderSyler Bitch, we LOST the fucking war. Go to school.
supremefireplace 1 year ago
CommanderSyler 1 year ago
download the art of war ebook and audio version for free at:
ideas4future(dot)webs(dot)com
x1XofflineX1x 1 year ago
Butchered translation.
Bloodlovefreak 1 year ago
"We lost no engagements in Vietnam" Ba ha ha ha, Ho Chi Mihn city bitches.
LosAngelesWeedSmoker 1 year ago
@LosAngelesWeedSmoker That was Saigon 1975. There was no US there just the ARVN. There was hardly a fight.
emmthreejonny 9 months ago
@emmthreejonny Dude... who cares, the U.S. lost tons on engagement... to say otherwise means you're as stupid as this dumb fuck lying to himself. Notice he didn't the U.S. lost no engagements, he said WE! He's an author, not a soldier. Ha ha ha....
LosAngelesWeedSmoker 9 months ago
@LosAngelesWeedSmoker - Stop smoking weed. Read books. Start caring.
emmthreejonny 9 months ago
@LosAngelesWeedSmoker Read books... ha ha ha. What a supreme dummy you are referring me to outdated books. Bet you $1,000,000.00 I can pull a book out from a Viet author who wrote in detail of how the U.S. lost some battles. Dude... it's fucking war, sick shit happened on both sides. Notice he said 'WE' and not the "U.S.". You believe propaganda from a turd book writer who was never deployed thus just a troll trying to make cash. Just look at Afghanistan, RAPE!
LosAngelesWeedSmoker 9 months ago
This just show Americans are idiots
lloveComedy 1 year ago
sun tzu is the best
kylecookie2 1 year ago
What does Master Sun Tzu say about using Fire in warfare....now you know why the napalm was used as it was.
America studied the military book, in basic training for officers, it is the OLDEST MILITARY TREATIES IN THE WORLD FFS, do you think Americans are dumb to avoid it in fundamental military education?
AntiSocialTroll 1 year ago
LOL
AntiSocialTroll 1 year ago
Guy at 6:30 is a total lier "we didn't lose any engagments"
runisunke 1 year ago
@runisunke What he meant is that they beat the Viet Cong in battles. In these engagements, the Viet Congs choose to withdraw in the end. It is sort of victory for American soldiers. The Viet Cong are avoiding a direct confrontation, prefering small scale ambushes.
MrLantean 11 months ago
lies you did lose battles. FSB Ripcord, Con Tein, Dak To. One of the greatest lies of the vietnam war was that the US never lost battles.
sexymalcom1970 1 year ago
The real trick to wars like Vietnam is simply kill all who raise arms against us.
No man, no problem.
SgtHydra 1 year ago
@SgtHydra
Did you even watch this? Westmoreland tried, and lost. And what was the most important aspect Sun Tzu mentions in his "Art of War"? Right. Humanity. Lose that, and lose the war on the homefront in no time.
You'd better stick to computergames.
bionicbongsmoker 1 year ago
@bionic You misunderstand me.
Sure, we tried to kill people and had some success with that, but we refused to advance even an inch into N. Vietnam.
Imagine trying to win the US Civil War without ever stepping across the Madison-Dixon Line. It'd be an impossible feat.
No one has ever won a war without stepping into enemy territory. You have to give someone the impression that defeat is inevitable in order to truly achieve victory. With Vietnam, we made their guerrilla tactics a viable strategy.
SgtHydra 1 year ago
@SgtHydra 'Killing everyone' isn't a viable stratergy in modern warfare.
1. Governments have to worry about the electorates view. They need the public to support their war.
2. There's a much larger international aspect. If a country starts violating what are seen as human rights they will be put under pressure to stop the war. In Vietnam the US had to fight a limited war so as to make sure the USSR and Chinese didnt become directly involved. Thats why they enver used nukes or invaded N Vietnam
00JakeR00 1 year ago
@00JakeR00 Clearly you don't know how wars are won.
You either do what it takes or you do not.
SgtHydra 1 year ago
@SgtHydra Clearly you have no grip on reality. SO you think it would be a good idea for US to nuke Vietnam, then millions of CHinese soldiers will flood down into SE Asia and you can forget the domino theory because all that shit is turning red, THailand, INdia, Philipines. Oh and lets not forget the USSR, they're going to retaliate with there own nuclear arsenol. MAD, mutually assured distruction e.g we're all dead.
In modern warfare you can't go all out dumbass, the US knew this.
00JakeR00 1 year ago
This is completely bullshit, the Vietcong had no control on the influence of the American people. These speakers all talk like the American people are a bunch of robots who should listen to everything the government tells them to. Lol sounds like they view the American people as nothing more than Propaganda. The reason why the people of America downplayed the war was not because of Vietcong influence. It was because the reasons for America to fight the war were stupid and brain washing tactics.
Sun6Tzu 1 year ago
@Sun6Tzu You said: The reason why the people of America downplayed the war was not because of Vietcong influence
how is that not so? Is it not the vietcong that kept inflicting casualties to us and kept sending U.S soldiers home in coffins? (lets not get into vietcong casualties...we are talking about this question) AND is it not the U.S media...that displayed the horrors of war and the impact of the tet offensive have on us?
xCookieBabi60616 4 months ago
@xCookieBabi60616 What happened in Vietnam, stayed in Vietnam. What happened in US, such as the people opposing the war, stayed only on US soil. The fact was the US government had to report it's own dead casualties sooner or later. They tried gift wrapping it by always reporting along more enemy KIA. They figured out a solution to this with these new wars in the middle east. They let PMC's do most of the dangerous work where casualties are higher, less official military deaths. Less reports.
Sun6Tzu 3 months ago
@Sun6Tzu You said: The fact was the US government had to report it's own dead casualties sooner or later.
How long is sooner or later...and then how can we trust it? Is it reasonable to think we lost 58k troops in just 10 years? I for one don't think so, especially with all those snipers and booby traps nonstop. I'm talking about ten years here and we only lost 58k?
Yes, but what PMCs were in vietnam? I know blackwater didn't exist back then.
Iraqendwar 3 months ago
@Iraqendwar The Iraq war holds the most PMC's used by western forces. PMC's are the 2nd largest armed force, after the US military. PMC's hold a larger presence than even the UK military.
Sun6Tzu 3 months ago
@Iraqendwar Don't forget there were about 320,000 South Vietnamese deaths during that time. The US was very prompt at notification of military troops with the exception of MIAs or POWs. The private military groups used during the was were Thai mercenaries, as well as Hmongs, Nungs, and Cambodians. They were trained and often used by US SF troops in Laos and Cambodia, as well as in Vietnam. Some actually worked in north Vietnam.
gerry301 1 month ago
@Sun6Tzu Never heard that before. And what about Jane Fonda in Hanoi? PMCs are usually used for personal protection of Iraqi or Afgan ministers and higher ups as well as other important people or agencies or for protection of critical facilities. Have never heard of them being used in battle or in "more dangerous" situations to keep military deaths down. I believe the death of the four contractors in Fallujha are included in the total number of deaths in Iraq. Any others you can name?
gerry301 1 month ago
fuck the vietcong !
martinmarine80 1 year ago
@martinmarine80 You still lost!
TheKiemaster 1 year ago
@martinmarine80
Fuck the Vietcongs trying to liberate their Country.
Fuck us American's Patriots for fighting the British off too huh?
You and me, lets lay down and let foreign powers overtake our country while we do nothing. You are a Genius...
runisunke 1 year ago
@runisunke OK OK ! ure right the v-c where fighting for there country and I would hate if our country got tooken over .
martinmarine80 1 year ago
We had no intentions of winning. It was a prolonged war for money
pigurine 1 year ago
4:50 reminds me of the revoultionary quote "don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes"
nairda55555 1 year ago
I'm sure that as an American, I should not say anything positive about the North Vietnamese Army, but Giap is as good a military leader as the world has ever seen. He fought off two, count 'em, two major military powers...France and America. If he had been on our side, we would have built statues of him and named schools in his honor.
Gorilla196094 1 year ago
No autobar getting in my way, here, I notice, you-tube!!!!
Andrea2rose 1 year ago
without the military and economic support of soviet union and china, there was no way north vietnam forces would have lasted that long
eastern2western 1 year ago
so ur telling me the viet cong knew about politics in america?
aplayaz2000 1 year ago
the battle of Ong Thanh and it took place on October 17 1967 about 50 miles north of Saigon
we lost..Bevin Alexander what a author he is
xxxdatxxx 1 year ago
Big country invades small country. It's not very effective.
TehWave 1 year ago
Sun: " Do not advance based alone on sheer military power "
- interesting.....
bigfatdick5000 1 year ago
They had some awesome tactics basically all the same the japs had in ww2
iTzMeThoDz 1 year ago
Sun Tzu sounds like a genius, but....... what if both sides uses the tactics of Sun Tzu. What would you need to do then to win that war.
onee 1 year ago
@onee one side will always be smarter and quicker.
lifes40123 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@onee You said: Sun Tzu sounds like a genius, but....... what if both sides uses the tactics of Sun Tzu. What would you need to do then to win that war.
Then whoever uses Sun Tzu's tactics the best wins. Good question though good question ;)
xCookieBabi60616 4 months ago
What is the song in 0:10???
EMEQ777 2 years ago
What has sun tzu to do with everything ? Everytime talk about the Vietnam war starts everybody is in awe how the midget beat the giant. What most people conveniently forget is, that the us knew where the leadership was, they could have just taken North Vietnam, but they have chosen not to, to avoid risking a larger conflict with China.
cassius969 2 years ago
@cassius969
Yes many people forget the fact that US did not invade north vietnam with ground troops. They only bombed it. They did not want to invade there and provoke china and soviet union.
If they had invaded north vietnam, the war may have been over for the commnuists.
But the north vietnamese fought a tough, clever war nevertheless.
womblewandering 1 year ago
@womblewandering Thats true?
ImperialGuard9001 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@womblewandering You said: If they had invaded north vietnam, the war may have been over for the commnuists.
How is that so? Do you mean the war is over for the vietnamese communists or do u mean all communist nations at that time?
Iraqendwar 4 months ago
@cassius969
You say: "The U.S tried to avoid China in the war"??? LOL What a laugh! You know what, in 1972, China and U.S.A officially become allies, how come U.S.A still didn't send troops to attack North Vietnam?? What an idiot!
KatiushaVN4 7 months ago
the weakness was at home. in the American public.
Tommy1977777 2 years ago
that doesn't make any sense at all
NOOBLMAO 2 years ago
and that is exactly why civilians are now capable of losing wars. allow me to explain: ever wonder why a country in which the U.S. was involved with for 25 years only lost 58,000 men? because the aim of guerilla warfare is political and not strictly military. it does kill people but it wants others to see who is killed. because most civilians dont like violence, it appals them. therefore making them want to end the war no matter what it takes. it convinces the civilian to say "this isnt worth it
Tommy1977777 2 years ago
now this is why the vietam war didnt turn out as well as it could have. the U.S. didnt lose in vietnam per se. war for the U.S. had simply enterd a different arena. we must now understand that when a war is fought that it is possible for both sides to achieve some political goal: for vietnam they achieved independance, for the U.S. communism went no further than vietnam. according to documentation from the National Security Council of that time: victory or defeat are irrelevant in vietnam.
Tommy1977777 2 years ago
we may have not learned the lessons of vietnam and how to battle in that time....we did learn.
Tommy1977777 2 years ago
It's Ho Chi Minh not Ha Chi Minh, dude.
minhhale 2 years ago
throw those grenade at those burgers
Tien1185 2 years ago 9
the burgers being the americans , right? burgers LOL..
WEMBLEYNE 2 years ago
Plz guys, Ho Chi Minh, not Ha Chi Minh, no wonder why you Americans lost in Vietnam. LOL
SouthernSlaveStates 2 years ago
the 3-d effects make me laugh, sad they dont have good effects like japanese shows
sengoku17 2 years ago
The legendary of Ho Chi Minh is historical and dynamic and equally say for the great general Vo Nguyen Giap. It's sad to say but general Giap is aging rapidly and soon he will depart from this world and Vietnam will plung to deep sorrow and sadness where Vietnamese once did when Ho Chi Minh deceased more than 40 yrs ago. My wishes to general Giap for great health and longevity.
LegendaryVNese 2 years ago 14
@LegendaryVNese even tho i hate him, giap... because he was a vietnamese commie and his people fought against my people.. i still have respects for my enemies
lifes40123 1 year ago
our army is the strongest but our will is the weakest
JohnAgent24 2 years ago 24
@JohnAgent24 Its not that the will was not there. Nam vets had it. Theirs were
to survive the bs vet war and come out in one piece. Vet war benefited no americans but to fuel the political goals of the government. It was good that the american ppl saw through the bs and forced their hand.
Just as Viet Nam war was a failure, current Iraq is the same.
cryfamm 1 year ago