How do they suppose to destroy the embassy with M14 and rocket launcher ? I think they wanted public attention. They wanted to show that if they can attack US embassy in the middle of Saigon, there is no where they can't attack.
They were trying to cause as much damage and fear as possible. The North Vietnamese were trying to lure American soldiers upward, away from the South. It was a success, afterward the Congs came in from the Cambodian Borders and from the North itself. They attacked major cities simultaneously and consecutively, some villages were defenseless and massacred as well. The American embessy took little damage, but there was plenty damage already done.
@LivingDeadVideos I disagree with the village massacre thing. In America civil war, can the North American massacre a South American town ? They are all people from the same country, it's hard to believe that they can that animalistic. If it was American troops that massacred villages then it might be credible, after all they weren't there for justice and they knew it.
@LivingDeadVideos I disagree with the village massacre thing. In America civil war, can the North American massacre a South American town ? They are all people from the same country, it's hard to believe that they can that animalistic. If it was American troops that massacred villages then it might be credible, after all they weren't there for justice and they knew it.
@LivingDeadVideos I disagree with the village massacre thing. In America civil war, can the North American massacre a South American town ? They are all people from the same country, it's hard to believe that they can that animalistic. If it was American troops that massacred villages then it might be credible, after all they weren't there for justice and they knew it.
The NVA and the VC were nearly wiped out during the Tet Offensive. The U.S. could've counterattacked by invading North Vietnam immediately. That would've end the war right there and then.
BTW to those that kept saying the U.S. never lost a battle in Vietnam, look up the battles of Ong Thanh, Lang Vei, July Two, Kham Duc, Dong Xoai and Fire Support Base Ripcord.
"Fighting from four hilltops, surrounded, and outnumbered nearly ten to one, U.S. forces caused heavy losses on eight enemy battalions before an aerial withdrawal under heavy mortar, anti-aircraft, and small arms fire. After the U.S. Army withdrew from the firebase, USAF B-52 heavy bombers were sent in to carpet bomb the area."
"Major General Ben Harrison, then the commander of the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne at FSB Ripcord, is of the opinion that perhaps the NVA losses at Ripcord, just as their losses of their major offensives of the Ia Drang in 1965 and Tet in 1968, dulled the offensive capability of PAVN for two full years, resulting in the delaying of their Easter Offensive from 1971 to 1972. "
@nerdmastermind ong thanh: "At around 12:00 pm Triet had already ordered his troops to disengage from the battle in the belief that all American soldiers had been killed, and also to avoid possible air-strikes from the fearsome B-52 bombers."
the nva left the field of battle first, therefore they lost the battle. don't get me wrong, this was a 'costly victory' but he who leaves the battle field first concedes.
this is like the american 'win' at bunker hill; the british actually won.
@nerdmastermind khan duc is questionable...as RELATIVELY few americans were killed (40) and several hundred south vietnamese soldiers were killed, one CAN say that it was an ARVN defeat; that the u.s. was there and lost several aircraft says it was also an american loss.
Comparing the conflict in Vietnam to Afghanistan is probably inaccurate. IMHO, the media coverage, amount of US troops and sheer damage to soldiers and populace ellipses the current struggle in Afghanistan.
The conflict in Iraq likely has more parallels, but man, this is a powerful snapshot of the Vietnam war and what happened during the Tet Offensive.
@redneckgunowner2 hahaha, let me suggest to you nother mission, gather up all your buddies and start another american revolution to usurp the current gov and also remove all traces of zionist freemasonic power on usa, so the american people could at last stop fighting for bad reason wars that kills innocent people as well as american soldiers, and also stop the injustice in your country and stop cooruption and domination of us economy by freemason zionists.
@redneckgunowner2 if you and your buddy could accomplish that than you deserve to be included in the hero of humanity hall of fame as long you dont taint your reputation. and the taliban and all islamists that you dont like previously will be your ally and would give their lives to help you.
@redneckgunowner2 kill Jihad ? JIhad is not a human, its a term for struggle. You can never kill jihad because it will always be there as long as there are people who submit to ALLAH SWT.
oh yeah the talibs also love killing people like you, its a sport for them.
Wow, the media really used to put in 100% for real events. This is moving. Unlike the CGI covered, tabloid news of today. Though I don't support the war in anyway I would still like to see what is going on covered In depth once in a while.
I'm sure they don't try as hard to get coverage also. Seeing as how it seems they would rather cover a story about the latest on Charlie Sheen or dog that can talk for ratings anyway.
@Gmancrap it also costs a lot of money to keep a correspondent and support crew in a war zone, which they'd rather spend toward promoting Charlie Sheen or talking dogs
Or you could just find a few, young and eager film students (Like myself) give them a little bit of money and have them do some good old investigative journalism. Wouldn't cost that much unless you are looking to film some kind of 4 hour, made for TV documentary. Which they probably are...
@Gmancrap That's because news used to be news. Now the "News" is nothing more than a group of like minded people forcing their opinions down the throats of the blind sheep that are the viewers. Oh, and everything is censored. The media is the 4th branch of the government, they tell you what they want you to know, nothing more.
@itsgangstabob indeed, the usa has done MANY many great things but the thing is today your country really has slowed down in "greatness" per say. and instead of american citizens doing their duty for their <ie bettering the country, the population is sucking the country dry of everything and ruining it
@itsgangstabob umm England is exponentially better than the u.s.a is now at least. during the 20th century i would say its safe to say everyone looked up to the us as a powerful friendly nation. Now, you guys are the most pathetic pieces of shit slowly falling apart from the inside. You cant deny it either, look at your country now compared to say 20 to 30 years ago. You'll see a huge change in everything great your country ever had.
@Utoobepooper Yeah, America really does suck. The iPhone is derivative. Facebook is WACK. Twitter has made journalism a joke. Blake Lively looks like a dog. Nobody around the world watched Avatar. Drake left Degrassi High FOR America in order to watch his back, cause now he's not just anybody. And you didn't just make a fool out of yourself on Youtube. Oh wait, you sure did.
@ZedEnd83 how many of those things did you do? or your average american citizen do? none, the thing with america today is the small percentage of good people are constraint by the large population of idiots
@Utoobepooper and you're right because you mandate it? If you're going to make broad, sweeping generalizations about a nation with 300mm+ population, let's hear some concrete reasons why.
And, since you seem to be the 21st century incarnation of Bill Gates, or maybe the Canadian version of Mark Zuckerberg, let's go through your laundry-list of impressive accomplishments (or lack thereof).
Here's a start: "ZedEnd83 has taught me the difference b/w the words 'constraint' and 'constrained'"
@wildkrrd ya your right, because i know nothing outside of my house, or city or country. yep, jeez its not like the globalization is a part of everyday life, or news both from my country AND yours. It's not like there's a global networking system via the internet that allows humans to interact and find out about different cultures and places. and its not like your country, the great USA is in its worse financial situation since the great oppression. ya its not like any of those thing are real :)
@Utoobepooper Yeah, while I agree that America has it's ups It cannot be argued that it's way of governing is tremendously arrogant. They tell the world to fix their debt problems and then they complain that they shouldn't have to raise their taxes because it would oppress the people.
amazing really. the viet cong didn't win the day but still achieved alot afterwards. it was very clever how they got so many men and weapons to those areas they planned to hit. The Americans on the other hand were very predictable in their attacks. maybe that is the reason why they lost in vietnam
@ipsilon160 The Viet Cong didn't really achieve that much at the end of the day. As a force the Viet Cong were destroyed in the Tet Offensive; they made the BIG classic mistake of crawling out of the shadows where they were most effective and engaging a superior force in open conventional warfare. The reason the US lost Vietnam is not due to tactics but the fact that the war was unwinnible from the start without doing things that would have dragged the USSR into World War III.
GOD and Me give moneys will make you and The White House rich In GOD We Trust GOD let us legalize prints out more moneys.GOD and Me helps you become rich just legalize printings out more moneys it will helps all the business to increases nomore poverty on earth than you rich.I let you know Remember GOD and Me show you how to be rich that like give you moneys.Helps each other become rich.Once you rich sents me moneys sents it to Son Nguyen 3834 San Marco Dr.Stockton,Ca.95212 thanks the real GOD
Hmm....so the North were defeated badly militarily in this offensive, yet it just proved that the stalemate wouldn't end anytime soon. My final view is that the US wasn't defeated militarily, but was convinced after Tet that a "victory" could only be achieved at a cost disproportionate to the gains. It was pull out and preserve force, or continue fighting to unacceptable ends.
the french ?? talk about a joke... hitler walked right thru the front door, we had to bail em out of that one. WW1 same thing, germany kicked ass, we bailed em out. they should have been goose stepping many times if not for the "good 'ol USofA"
so in my opinion, they should keep quiet, and stick to kissing !!!
@truckerfromreno yeah and were probably protecting your countrys ass right now...... dick head..... you aint no trucker from reno, or you would'nt be talking shit...... unless your another imigrant in the country your knocking... we have a name for people like you..... its SCUMBAG .... go home scumbag.....
@timjessa1 All yanks are immigrants you dumb fuckwit. Go home whitey. You couldn't protect your own shitty country. Some sand Arabs with toy knives knock down some ugly buildings and a country of 300,000,000 shit their panties at the same time. You're a fucking joke.
@truckerfromreno 'sand arabs" my arent we the xenophobic little boy that likes to get ass fucked by vietnamese men (or was it women? regardless, that's rather odd).
actually, the knives the hijackers had were real, and the rammed jets into buildings. if not for the incompetent leadership of cheney and bush, bin laden would be dead. wait, he's dead now.
where does your desire to get boinked up the arese by vietnamese and hatred of the u.s. come from? are you really THAT impotent?
@neoconsnightmare3 ...well said sir !!! i let that half wit get my anger up, and the best way to deal with them is as you did.. with facts !!!! god bless america, and you take care.....
@timjessa1 hey, timjesa. yeah, he's feeling weak and insecure. i like his kind of fool. notice, he had NO comeback for englands HUMILITING defeats that got them RUN OUT of kenya, israel and s. africa (the boers kicked british ass in TWO of three boer wars).
@neoconsnightmare3 So do you hear what Robert Gates said lately? Gates criticized what ever he believes is wrong, no bias. Some NATO countries don't do half the work other countries do.
Now i can understand why Europeans enjoyed a great-welfare than us because they have been living our defense budget for years.
What's pathetic, is that UK is asking for more bombs from the US for the Libya because they are running out of bombs which put more burden than us.
@Hperman09 hey, i've said all along i'm not a fan of bombing libya, since, selfishly, i could care less what happens in any country but the u.s. and the two countries touching the u.s.
that said, i don't lose TOO much sleep over libya, since it's only missles/bombs that are made (at least it keeps plants open and people working, right)? in a sense, it's 'only money' and no american lives have been lost.
but the money would be better spent in the u.s., like the 2 TRILLION wasted in iraq.
@HimmelsscheibeNebra We are but when it comes to NATO, the US foots the bill and that cost us a burden. of course as part of the favor for UK and France helping us out in two wars, we help them in Libya. The problem is that NATO is running out of bombs then wanted us to foot the bill again.
Even NATO officials now that air-power along isn't going to ouster Gaddfi's forces.
I fear the whole "western world" will go sooner or later bancrupt. There are so many signs, not enough bombs is only a part of the story. We will in some time not even have enough money for fuel, munition and other basic needs. Look at Europe and to the US, overall the same signs. We will simply run out of money to go to war. No problem for me so far. But when we will not be even able to defend ourself? Then it will get bad. I'm against war, but keep ability to defend ourself.
@HimmelsscheibeNebra Even what i read lately, even UK and it's NATO allies believes that Air-Power itself cannot win this conflict alone. They also complain that the Libyan rebels are not doing enough either. Even some rebels admit it themselves. I know the Rebels were there, but they're definitely not a modern army. The *best* they could hope for with air power was a Gadhafi surrender. Any politician tells that we can win without NATO ground troops is lying.
It is what most politicians fear (in many European countries): the need to use and to send ground troops. It is probably the reason why these days so many air strikes target on Gadhafi's residences. The last hope to probably solve the problem by air strikes. I believe that they know it, but that they hide behind hope and fear. Sending ground troops always risks an uncontrolled extend of war and uncontrolled political complications (e.g. German soldiers in Nothern Africa)...
@HimmelsscheibeNebra NATO thought that if they declared a no fly zone, took out Libya’s air-defenses, and bombed a few targets, Gaddafi would surrender easily. But NATO did not take into account the historical FACT that airpower by itself could not resolve the problem. Gadhafi knows that the NATO isn't going to put ground troops in, thus has to outlast an air campaign, just like Hussein was able to do for a dozen years in the 90s GW ceasefire.
@HimmelsscheibeNebra I don't know but even if it's a ground war, people of NATO countries is going to get pissed and will protest the war. Just like how we Americans get involved because Europeans asked us too.
@truckerfromreno ... now it makes sense, your a brit.... i aint gonna knock the brits cuz most of them are stand up guys that i've met, but you sir SUCK..... by the way england had troops in 'nam too , smart ass.... now pull into a truck stop and have your "spot of tea" .... fuckin sissy .....
@truckerfromreno technically, the u.s. didn't 'surrender' in vietnam. nixon (piece of shit though he was) bombed the hell out of them, and made them come to the peace table.
then, vietnam was punished (wrongly i believe) for 20 years after the war...begging the u.s. to let it back into the world community.
though 'communist' officially, they've got quite the little capitalist system going on, and they're begging vietnamese who left and started businesses to come back. long term, u.s. won.
@truckerfromreno wow, so when the british got their asses kicked by the boers in three wars, and they SURRENDERED, does that make them 'surrendering cowards'?
or when they were driven out of kenya and israel? does that make them 'surrendering cowards'?
@neoconsnightmare3 They didn't lose those wars they just had a tough time. The rest is what you call the 'end of empire' and this is something you are experiencing now. The main difference is that the British Empire lasted for 300 years and is the biggest empire the world has ever seen, whereas, the American version (a copy of the British model even using the same language and economic/legal system), lasted for 80 years and was pretty limited in its influence. You have to deal with your loss
@truckerfromreno no, britain LOST two of the three boer wars and LEFT s. africa.
i am not an empire, neither are you. why you feel bad about england being a second rate power is beyond me. you didnt colonize, nor did you profit directly from britains empire.
the american 'empire' one could argue started in 1898, and as it's still going (if one is to call it an 'empire') or 113 year.
the british were DRIVEN from kenya. period. israel, as 'peacekeppers', they were DRIVEN out. period.
@neoconsnightmare3 1898? Don't be silly. WWI America gained some power as the other countries had spent their wealth in wars but only really became a serious power during WWII, again for the same reasons. America has had it easy as you have not had any rivals (they were ravaged by war). Now China is in the lead (I bet they don't tell you that on that heavily censored American TV) so you only lasted for about 80 years. Look at the size of my country - aren't we amazing? Thank you.
@truckerfromreno learn history. i said IF you're to say america had an 'empire', you have to go back to 1898, the spanish american war. the u.s. gained cuba and the phillipines. people considered that not only 'expansionist' but 'colonial'.
the u.s. AT THAT POINT became a world power.
whether the u.s. had it easy or not is besides the point.
china is in the lead as far as economy? yep. and thats why they dont want anything to happen to the u.s., as we're their biggest consumers.
@truckerfromreno actually...dominating the entire western hemisphere (after killing off the native americans) , then cuba in the caribbean with the phillipines in the far pacific...yeah that's pretty frigging huge.
your personal opinions simply don't matter. history says that u.s. expansionism and colonialism began in 1898 with the defeat of spain in the spanish american empire.
@neoconsnightmare3 Well ours began several hundred years before and involved starting your country off too. BEAT THAT. By that the way, what's the name of the language we are communicating in? he he Come back when you've done something.
@neoconsnightmare3 I now I understand why Americans don't understand the concept of history. Talking about your life-time, how did you get humiliated and defeated by little Vietnam?
@truckerfromreno The US was not defeated militarily in this war. In fact if US got it's assed kicked in this war, explain the casualties rates
The US lost 50,000 while the NVA/VC lost around 1,000,000. So it's proof that US kicked their asses militarily.
The US pulled out due to massive protests and the ARVN all need was the American air-support Congress chose to not fund it so technically the US lost support for ARVN so ARVN got defeated because al lthe need was air-support.
@truckerfromreno we speak modern english. i speak AMERICAN english, and you may speak the queen's english (though, given your ignorance, likely some gutter cockney).
doesn't matter...languages evolve, simp. english is a mish mash of latin, celtic, germanic languages, scandinavian, etc.
you trying to take credit for language that has been around for thousands of years before you were born? you ARE sad.
@truckerfromreno "But you weren't born then and neither was your country"
precisely. you're learning.
"What about the humiliating defeat by little Vietnam?"
what about your 'humiliating defeatS by a group guys (not even a 'country' for God's sake) called the 'boers' in two of three boer wars that ended up with britain being kicked out of s. africa? that had to hurt.
@neoconsnightmare3 ... he will never shut up and face the numerous facts you so handly shoved down his throat.. now you have the jack-ass grasping for straws on language origins...... haha well done...
@neoconsnightmare3 Exactly, look at the size of our country and look how we lead the way. Aren't we amazing? It's time for you to face that you're also a second-rate, post-colonial power. We dealt with our loss and now it's your turn. Best wishes.
@truckerfromreno well, nobody is calling the u.s. a second rate power NOW. what will happen in 10 or 20 years is anybody's guess.
TODAY america is still the only superpower. tomorrow china will share superpower status (unless their economy goes to crap, which is possible but not likely)....and england IS a 2nd rate power.
hurts you, doesn't it. you never got to live in england's power days, and i'm living in americans power days. bwahahahahaha
@hanzohadow ..i agree entirely or otherwise people at home would've realized we were winning the war still since we started and havent lost a battle to the nva and vc
@MultiHeadbanger666 that's not entirely true...the u.s. MAY have lost one battle...the battle of Ong Thanh.
i say 'may' because out of 150 men of one company that was led into an ambush, 50 or so were killed and 75 wounded. many consider this a 'loss', but the nva had left the field before the americans, so many consider this either a 'draw' or a 'win' for the u.s.
it would be a 'win' like the battle of bunker hill...the americans left because they ran out of ammo, so a british win.
@neoconsnightmare3 ...but the nva didnt leave because they ran out of ammo they left as a retreat due to thier own casualities also to stay alive or otherwise they would've died as well as their comrades..we held our ground despite being hit from a vicious ambush
@MultiHeadbanger666 multi, agreed, but they left the field of battle first (for reasons of their own survivaland the survival of their wounded) just like the americans did at bunker hill (in that case they ran out of ammo).
you leave the field of battle first (as the nva did in ong thanh) and you 'lose'.
@neoconsnightmare3 They lost loads and loads you mug. They LOST the war. Obviously your media doesn't tell you truth it never has and never will. For fucks sake you Americans even swallow the whole 9/11 cover story, you're just very guillable to the extent that you believe you only lost one battle in a long war in which you were defeated.
@truckerfromreno the americans 'lost' 55,000 soldiers. how many did the north vietnamese and viet cong lose...oh yeah, 1.5 to 2 MILLION.
i'm not 'gullible' i'm factual. i know the americans lost the war...there was no strategy and they half fought the war.
they did, however, win all but one battle, and even that one, because the nva left the field first (for whatever reason) could be considered a win for the u.s. (though costly).
for fucks sake, why do you non americans get so jealous
@truckerfromreno 'fucked in the arse'? no, i'm not a british man.
LOL...okay, that was a cheap shot and i'd be stooping to your level.
sorry, i am not part of the u.s. government, was born the year the 'combat' part of the war started, and joined the military 12 years after the fall of saigon.
how exactly did i get 'fucked', much less 'anally'? or was that your way of telling the world what you like?
@truckerfromreno i see now why you're so angry...you're from england.
ho chi minh himself didn't expect to win battles. he would just outlast the u.s.
they did expect to win tet, and found out that though 3,000 americans died, (4100 allies) but more than 44,000 vietcong died. after tet, the nva did all the fighting and the vietcong were essentially broken.
the americans werent the french, and the nva knew it. their job was to keep fighting, keep popping up. thats why they won.
@MultiHeadbanger666 one american officer wrote a book 'lost battle of vietnam' and there's a website that shows these examples.
HOWEVER, most of the 'lost battles' are real are really american 'wins' at a high price/cost in life/materiel to the u.s.
outside of ong thanh, all the others are :
'skirmishes' of the hit and run kind, like an attack on an airbase (not a battle, but a 'sapper' attack), or one platoon suffering huge losses but the brigade/battalion winning the battle.
Anyone here know that the Tet Offensive was actually a great military victory for the US, but it was also a great POLITICAL victory for the communists? I guess the media "accidentally" messed up delivering that information. Damn liberal media.
@moastytoasty54 actually, i agree with you on tet. it was a military DISASTER for the viet cong (pretty much destroyed them, and from then on the north vietnamese fought the war). and it was a POLITICAL loss for the u.s., but then the whole war could be seen like that. ho chi minh even said we'll lose the battles, but win the war on the streets and living rooms in america.
however, it wasn't just the 'liberal media'. nixon ran on a 'victory with honor', meaning 'get the hell out'.
The Press was the main reason America lost the war, the press didn't know when to keep out of their own business in Vietnam and still happens today but rarely
@TheOnlGreatAlexander Yeah that's the only reason why we lost, because of the press. It's not because the communists had influence throughout the country before we were even fully involved or anything or because our military wasn't exactly suited for this kind of conflict. Nope it was the press.
I make it in short, why you guy so interested in the war while every lost some thing? I changed my mind a bit today when I saw a movie, a South soldier take care of his comrades, a US marines cried for his friends and many Vietnamese people died, a Communist soldier cried around his friend corpses. Every one lost some thing in war. Why it still happen ? Today ? Some one said "In war, there are NO VICTORY, ALL LOST"
RIP Col. Ripley. A great Marine! The trucks the NVA were using to convoy troops and munitions were Fords - made in a Soviet factory designed and built by the Ford Motor Company. The fuel that powered them came from Soviet oil fields developed by American interests with close ties to the Rockefeller oil cartel. Before any military action in Viet Nam could occur the US cleared it through the UN - whose military deputy was a Soviet General....
Vietnam was a horrible war..I'm canadian but My father who's 62 knew some buddies of his who joined the American Military during vietnam,they never came back..
@neymoura any race (not to mention judism is a religion) can try hard at succeeding and end up taking jobs from others because they are better at the job.
Gee dontcha wanna be a saudi arab king. Pay some poor bastard jews a few dollars and in return you get the u.s. navy, the air force... army and marines. They'll clean your house, stand outside your door and protect you from the devil, they just charge a little more. So HELL YES... I wanna be a saudi arab king. When I climb out of that learjet people gonna say.. wow.. what a peach. And I'm gonna laugh my way to the bank cause Im carrying your MO'NEY.
@halipocoka The universal congenital blindness of the Vietnamese people is not widely known. I'm glad you pointed it out!
In any case, the USA only "FAILED" (in preventing the conquering of South Vietnam) because the US (or elements in the government) deliberately chose to do so. The US did not "win" because they were unwilling, for moral and political, reasons to destroy North Vietnam by waging total war. Instead, the US chose to negotiate a peace and leave. Some think this was better.
@halipocoka given your grasp of history is fairly loose, i'll be gentle.
the u.s. kicked all kinds of MILITARY ass in the vietnam war. the vietcong were all but exterminated after 'Tet', a battle they THOUGHT they would win (by popular uprising).
the north lost all major battles and medium battles. they MAY have won one skirmish.
bottom line: the u.s. chose the wrong (read that as WEAK) side. they should have supported ho when he asked for it and laughed at the french.
@neoconsnightmare3 I fucking well know about the Vietnam war you twat i just studied it in History 2 years ago. I just dislike the americans or moreover their stupid fucking tactics such as bombing and killing so many civilians thats why I'm criticizing them ffs.
How did the Viet Cong get American weapons?
schueaj 2 days ago
How do they suppose to destroy the embassy with M14 and rocket launcher ? I think they wanted public attention. They wanted to show that if they can attack US embassy in the middle of Saigon, there is no where they can't attack.
aclock2 1 month ago
@aclock2 Precisely.
They were trying to cause as much damage and fear as possible. The North Vietnamese were trying to lure American soldiers upward, away from the South. It was a success, afterward the Congs came in from the Cambodian Borders and from the North itself. They attacked major cities simultaneously and consecutively, some villages were defenseless and massacred as well. The American embessy took little damage, but there was plenty damage already done.
LivingDeadVideos 1 month ago
@LivingDeadVideos I disagree with the village massacre thing. In America civil war, can the North American massacre a South American town ? They are all people from the same country, it's hard to believe that they can that animalistic. If it was American troops that massacred villages then it might be credible, after all they weren't there for justice and they knew it.
aclock2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LivingDeadVideos I disagree with the village massacre thing. In America civil war, can the North American massacre a South American town ? They are all people from the same country, it's hard to believe that they can that animalistic. If it was American troops that massacred villages then it might be credible, after all they weren't there for justice and they knew it.
aclock2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LivingDeadVideos I disagree with the village massacre thing. In America civil war, can the North American massacre a South American town ? They are all people from the same country, it's hard to believe that they can that animalistic. If it was American troops that massacred villages then it might be credible, after all they weren't there for justice and they knew it.
aclock2 1 month ago
eee all is ok (BOOOM)
eee
guillermola 1 month ago
Ameriac plz do not poke your nose in other's affairs.
maymar1 1 month ago
Who is the MP in the begining, I see him in videos all the time. What happened to him?
bioshockfan1 1 month ago
We should do a reenactment there just for shits & giggles.
ffairlane57 2 months ago
The NVA and the VC were nearly wiped out during the Tet Offensive. The U.S. could've counterattacked by invading North Vietnam immediately. That would've end the war right there and then.
BTW to those that kept saying the U.S. never lost a battle in Vietnam, look up the battles of Ong Thanh, Lang Vei, July Two, Kham Duc, Dong Xoai and Fire Support Base Ripcord.
nerdmastermind 2 months ago
@nerdmastermind What if China intervene again?
coolkorsah1 2 months ago
@coolkorsah1 It would be Korea all over again.
nerdmastermind 2 months ago
@nerdmastermind firebase ripcord:
"Fighting from four hilltops, surrounded, and outnumbered nearly ten to one, U.S. forces caused heavy losses on eight enemy battalions before an aerial withdrawal under heavy mortar, anti-aircraft, and small arms fire. After the U.S. Army withdrew from the firebase, USAF B-52 heavy bombers were sent in to carpet bomb the area."
neoconsnightmare3 1 month ago
@nerdmastermind firebase ripcord cont:
"Major General Ben Harrison, then the commander of the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne at FSB Ripcord, is of the opinion that perhaps the NVA losses at Ripcord, just as their losses of their major offensives of the Ia Drang in 1965 and Tet in 1968, dulled the offensive capability of PAVN for two full years, resulting in the delaying of their Easter Offensive from 1971 to 1972. "
that's a win for the u.s.
neoconsnightmare3 1 month ago
@nerdmastermind actually, many of the 'battles' you speak of were won by the u.s, others did not have u.s. units, just u.s. advisors.
lang vei: 24 U.S. Special Forces personnel
500 Montagnard and Vietnamese CIDG soldiers[2]
350 Royal Laotian Army soldiers
7 americans were killed, but it was an ARVN/Montagnard/royal laotian loss.
neoconsnightmare3 1 month ago
@nerdmastermind ong thanh: "At around 12:00 pm Triet had already ordered his troops to disengage from the battle in the belief that all American soldiers had been killed, and also to avoid possible air-strikes from the fearsome B-52 bombers."
the nva left the field of battle first, therefore they lost the battle. don't get me wrong, this was a 'costly victory' but he who leaves the battle field first concedes.
this is like the american 'win' at bunker hill; the british actually won.
neoconsnightmare3 1 month ago
@nerdmastermind khan duc is questionable...as RELATIVELY few americans were killed (40) and several hundred south vietnamese soldiers were killed, one CAN say that it was an ARVN defeat; that the u.s. was there and lost several aircraft says it was also an american loss.
neoconsnightmare3 1 month ago
Comparing the conflict in Vietnam to Afghanistan is probably inaccurate. IMHO, the media coverage, amount of US troops and sheer damage to soldiers and populace ellipses the current struggle in Afghanistan.
The conflict in Iraq likely has more parallels, but man, this is a powerful snapshot of the Vietnam war and what happened during the Tet Offensive.
trevmiesterj 3 months ago
the americans lost the war.
Afghanistan = next vietnam. we'll see
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@ilikeagent047 we did not lose the vietnam war,we got bored and left
redneckgunowner2 3 months ago
@redneckgunowner2 oh you again..
nope you guys lost it, cause you all cant take it anymore.
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@ilikeagent047 yes im back because i like to bug you..................its realy really fun
redneckgunowner2 3 months ago
@redneckgunowner2 ooo what a noble cause, too bad I aint bugged.
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@ilikeagent047 damn I have failed my missioin
redneckgunowner2 3 months ago
@redneckgunowner2 hahaha, let me suggest to you nother mission, gather up all your buddies and start another american revolution to usurp the current gov and also remove all traces of zionist freemasonic power on usa, so the american people could at last stop fighting for bad reason wars that kills innocent people as well as american soldiers, and also stop the injustice in your country and stop cooruption and domination of us economy by freemason zionists.
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@redneckgunowner2 if you and your buddy could accomplish that than you deserve to be included in the hero of humanity hall of fame as long you dont taint your reputation. and the taliban and all islamists that you dont like previously will be your ally and would give their lives to help you.
think about it.
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@ilikeagent047 ........thinking.......
redneckgunowner2 3 months ago
@redneckgunowner2 yeah go think about it.
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@ilikeagent047 but i like killing jihad its realy fun
redneckgunowner2 3 months ago
@redneckgunowner2 kill Jihad ? JIhad is not a human, its a term for struggle. You can never kill jihad because it will always be there as long as there are people who submit to ALLAH SWT.
oh yeah the talibs also love killing people like you, its a sport for them.
^_^
ilikeagent047 3 months ago
@ilikeagent047 you say tomado i say jihad
redneckgunowner2 3 months ago
0:09 Forrest Gump??
Tasarte 3 months ago
BOOM! Vietcong, you slippery bastards. Well done, lads.
FionaBoosh 4 months ago
Viet Cong 1 - USA 0
MANYA40 4 months ago
@MANYA40 Nobody won that war-Vietnam was isolated for decades after the conflict.
trevmiesterj 3 months ago
Fuck those communist shit heads
techgeek97 4 months ago
Now that's true bravery and patriotism (I'm talking about the Viet Cong here).
OrthodoxDarwinist 4 months ago
South Vietnamese Doug MacArthur @ 6:38?
justingreenwell 4 months ago 8
everybody seems to forget that North Vietnam really were fighting against a dictatorship government and that they were, essentially, the good guys.
thebobsterjones 5 months ago
my time in afghanistan is nothing compared to this
153masterchief 5 months ago
fuck the viets scums
usa466 5 months ago
@usa466 What did I do?
XShynobiX 5 months ago
@usa466 fuck the yanks scums
phudn 4 months ago
@usa466 Fuck off.
Hperman09 4 months ago
Wow, the media really used to put in 100% for real events. This is moving. Unlike the CGI covered, tabloid news of today. Though I don't support the war in anyway I would still like to see what is going on covered In depth once in a while.
Gmancrap 5 months ago 17
@Gmancrap It's a question of access ... the military doesn't allow full access to events and people like they did in Vietnam anymore.
jerryg1964 3 months ago
I'm sure they don't try as hard to get coverage also. Seeing as how it seems they would rather cover a story about the latest on Charlie Sheen or dog that can talk for ratings anyway.
Gmancrap 3 months ago
@Gmancrap it also costs a lot of money to keep a correspondent and support crew in a war zone, which they'd rather spend toward promoting Charlie Sheen or talking dogs
jerryg1964 3 months ago
Or you could just find a few, young and eager film students (Like myself) give them a little bit of money and have them do some good old investigative journalism. Wouldn't cost that much unless you are looking to film some kind of 4 hour, made for TV documentary. Which they probably are...
Gmancrap 3 months ago
@Gmancrap That's because news used to be news. Now the "News" is nothing more than a group of like minded people forcing their opinions down the throats of the blind sheep that are the viewers. Oh, and everything is censored. The media is the 4th branch of the government, they tell you what they want you to know, nothing more.
Bradlyeon 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Would you kill a terrorist-communist commando who slained your whole family?
kjbf976 6 months ago
GET OUT. GET OUT. GET OUT YOU.
Aussie MPs. Awesome.
gozac123 6 months ago
@itsgangstabob indeed, the usa has done MANY many great things but the thing is today your country really has slowed down in "greatness" per say. and instead of american citizens doing their duty for their <ie bettering the country, the population is sucking the country dry of everything and ruining it
Utoobepooper 6 months ago
@itsgangstabob umm England is exponentially better than the u.s.a is now at least. during the 20th century i would say its safe to say everyone looked up to the us as a powerful friendly nation. Now, you guys are the most pathetic pieces of shit slowly falling apart from the inside. You cant deny it either, look at your country now compared to say 20 to 30 years ago. You'll see a huge change in everything great your country ever had.
Utoobepooper 6 months ago
@Utoobepooper yea
jasenrooks2001 6 months ago
@Utoobepooper Yeah, America really does suck. The iPhone is derivative. Facebook is WACK. Twitter has made journalism a joke. Blake Lively looks like a dog. Nobody around the world watched Avatar. Drake left Degrassi High FOR America in order to watch his back, cause now he's not just anybody. And you didn't just make a fool out of yourself on Youtube. Oh wait, you sure did.
ZedEnd83 6 months ago
@ZedEnd83 how many of those things did you do? or your average american citizen do? none, the thing with america today is the small percentage of good people are constraint by the large population of idiots
Utoobepooper 6 months ago
@Utoobepooper and you're right because you mandate it? If you're going to make broad, sweeping generalizations about a nation with 300mm+ population, let's hear some concrete reasons why.
And, since you seem to be the 21st century incarnation of Bill Gates, or maybe the Canadian version of Mark Zuckerberg, let's go through your laundry-list of impressive accomplishments (or lack thereof).
Here's a start: "ZedEnd83 has taught me the difference b/w the words 'constraint' and 'constrained'"
phjun8383 6 months ago
@Utoobepooper How do you know? You don't live here.
wildkrrd 6 months ago
@wildkrrd ya your right, because i know nothing outside of my house, or city or country. yep, jeez its not like the globalization is a part of everyday life, or news both from my country AND yours. It's not like there's a global networking system via the internet that allows humans to interact and find out about different cultures and places. and its not like your country, the great USA is in its worse financial situation since the great oppression. ya its not like any of those thing are real :)
Utoobepooper 6 months ago
@Utoobepooper *great depression, woops
Utoobepooper 6 months ago
@Utoobepooper Yeah, while I agree that America has it's ups It cannot be argued that it's way of governing is tremendously arrogant. They tell the world to fix their debt problems and then they complain that they shouldn't have to raise their taxes because it would oppress the people.
thebobsterjones 5 months ago
amazing really. the viet cong didn't win the day but still achieved alot afterwards. it was very clever how they got so many men and weapons to those areas they planned to hit. The Americans on the other hand were very predictable in their attacks. maybe that is the reason why they lost in vietnam
ipsilon160 7 months ago
@ipsilon160 The Viet Cong didn't really achieve that much at the end of the day. As a force the Viet Cong were destroyed in the Tet Offensive; they made the BIG classic mistake of crawling out of the shadows where they were most effective and engaging a superior force in open conventional warfare. The reason the US lost Vietnam is not due to tactics but the fact that the war was unwinnible from the start without doing things that would have dragged the USSR into World War III.
ginjaninja1988 7 months ago
@ginjaninja1988 what things were contemplated -- are you talking about usa using nuclear arms?
maxLeifermann 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOD and Me give moneys will make you and The White House rich In GOD We Trust GOD let us legalize prints out more moneys.GOD and Me helps you become rich just legalize printings out more moneys it will helps all the business to increases nomore poverty on earth than you rich.I let you know Remember GOD and Me show you how to be rich that like give you moneys.Helps each other become rich.Once you rich sents me moneys sents it to Son Nguyen 3834 San Marco Dr.Stockton,Ca.95212 thanks the real GOD
Moneys527 7 months ago
Hmm....so the North were defeated badly militarily in this offensive, yet it just proved that the stalemate wouldn't end anytime soon. My final view is that the US wasn't defeated militarily, but was convinced after Tet that a "victory" could only be achieved at a cost disproportionate to the gains. It was pull out and preserve force, or continue fighting to unacceptable ends.
primeholyassasin20 7 months ago
@primeholyassasin20 Didn't have the balls for it.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
Comment removed
SanderGlashouwer 8 months ago
the french ?? talk about a joke... hitler walked right thru the front door, we had to bail em out of that one. WW1 same thing, germany kicked ass, we bailed em out. they should have been goose stepping many times if not for the "good 'ol USofA"
so in my opinion, they should keep quiet, and stick to kissing !!!
timjessa1 8 months ago
@timjessa1 he French got humiliated in Vietnam just like the Americans did. You're both surrendering cowards. ha ha
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno yeah and were probably protecting your countrys ass right now...... dick head..... you aint no trucker from reno, or you would'nt be talking shit...... unless your another imigrant in the country your knocking... we have a name for people like you..... its SCUMBAG .... go home scumbag.....
timjessa1 7 months ago
@timjessa1 All yanks are immigrants you dumb fuckwit. Go home whitey. You couldn't protect your own shitty country. Some sand Arabs with toy knives knock down some ugly buildings and a country of 300,000,000 shit their panties at the same time. You're a fucking joke.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno 'sand arabs" my arent we the xenophobic little boy that likes to get ass fucked by vietnamese men (or was it women? regardless, that's rather odd).
actually, the knives the hijackers had were real, and the rammed jets into buildings. if not for the incompetent leadership of cheney and bush, bin laden would be dead. wait, he's dead now.
where does your desire to get boinked up the arese by vietnamese and hatred of the u.s. come from? are you really THAT impotent?
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 I just like the truth and to live in reality my friend. I'm not anti-American I'm just anti revisionist history.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno no, you like reciting the truth as you mishandle it. your right. i'll just be around to correct you.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@timjessa1 truckergirlfromreno is just mad because he's a nobody from a 2nd rate nation.
i'll just laugh at his impotent rage.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 You're confused mate - I'm British.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno i'm quite on point...you're a brit, and great britain, alas, is a 2nd rate power.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 ...well said sir !!! i let that half wit get my anger up, and the best way to deal with them is as you did.. with facts !!!! god bless america, and you take care.....
timjessa1 7 months ago
@timjessa1 hey, timjesa. yeah, he's feeling weak and insecure. i like his kind of fool. notice, he had NO comeback for englands HUMILITING defeats that got them RUN OUT of kenya, israel and s. africa (the boers kicked british ass in TWO of three boer wars).
take care, yourself.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 So do you hear what Robert Gates said lately? Gates criticized what ever he believes is wrong, no bias. Some NATO countries don't do half the work other countries do.
Now i can understand why Europeans enjoyed a great-welfare than us because they have been living our defense budget for years.
What's pathetic, is that UK is asking for more bombs from the US for the Libya because they are running out of bombs which put more burden than us.
Hperman09 7 months ago
@Hperman09 hey, i've said all along i'm not a fan of bombing libya, since, selfishly, i could care less what happens in any country but the u.s. and the two countries touching the u.s.
that said, i don't lose TOO much sleep over libya, since it's only missles/bombs that are made (at least it keeps plants open and people working, right)? in a sense, it's 'only money' and no american lives have been lost.
but the money would be better spent in the u.s., like the 2 TRILLION wasted in iraq.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@Hperman09
You should help the UK, it is your closest ally, isn't it?
HimmelsscheibeNebra 7 months ago
@HimmelsscheibeNebra We are but when it comes to NATO, the US foots the bill and that cost us a burden. of course as part of the favor for UK and France helping us out in two wars, we help them in Libya. The problem is that NATO is running out of bombs then wanted us to foot the bill again.
Even NATO officials now that air-power along isn't going to ouster Gaddfi's forces.
Hperman09 7 months ago
@Hperman09
I fear the whole "western world" will go sooner or later bancrupt. There are so many signs, not enough bombs is only a part of the story. We will in some time not even have enough money for fuel, munition and other basic needs. Look at Europe and to the US, overall the same signs. We will simply run out of money to go to war. No problem for me so far. But when we will not be even able to defend ourself? Then it will get bad. I'm against war, but keep ability to defend ourself.
HimmelsscheibeNebra 7 months ago
@HimmelsscheibeNebra Even what i read lately, even UK and it's NATO allies believes that Air-Power itself cannot win this conflict alone. They also complain that the Libyan rebels are not doing enough either. Even some rebels admit it themselves. I know the Rebels were there, but they're definitely not a modern army. The *best* they could hope for with air power was a Gadhafi surrender. Any politician tells that we can win without NATO ground troops is lying.
Hperman09 7 months ago 2
@Hperman09
It is what most politicians fear (in many European countries): the need to use and to send ground troops. It is probably the reason why these days so many air strikes target on Gadhafi's residences. The last hope to probably solve the problem by air strikes. I believe that they know it, but that they hide behind hope and fear. Sending ground troops always risks an uncontrolled extend of war and uncontrolled political complications (e.g. German soldiers in Nothern Africa)...
HimmelsscheibeNebra 7 months ago
@HimmelsscheibeNebra NATO thought that if they declared a no fly zone, took out Libya’s air-defenses, and bombed a few targets, Gaddafi would surrender easily. But NATO did not take into account the historical FACT that airpower by itself could not resolve the problem. Gadhafi knows that the NATO isn't going to put ground troops in, thus has to outlast an air campaign, just like Hussein was able to do for a dozen years in the 90s GW ceasefire.
Hperman09 7 months ago
@Hperman09
Your statement has proofed true in the meantime (for Lybia) and by history (e.g. in Vietnam).
I wonder how the history will be written in Libya. For the moment it's getting a ground war and probably a civil war.
History always repeats itself.
HimmelsscheibeNebra 6 months ago
@HimmelsscheibeNebra I don't know but even if it's a ground war, people of NATO countries is going to get pissed and will protest the war. Just like how we Americans get involved because Europeans asked us too.
Hperman09 6 months ago
@truckerfromreno ... now it makes sense, your a brit.... i aint gonna knock the brits cuz most of them are stand up guys that i've met, but you sir SUCK..... by the way england had troops in 'nam too , smart ass.... now pull into a truck stop and have your "spot of tea" .... fuckin sissy .....
timjessa1 7 months ago
@timjessa1 No British in the Vietnam War mate. I'd check that if I was you.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@timjessa1 You surrendered in Vietnam I think that makes you a shit house and a sissy. What happened on 9/11 he he?
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno technically, the u.s. didn't 'surrender' in vietnam. nixon (piece of shit though he was) bombed the hell out of them, and made them come to the peace table.
then, vietnam was punished (wrongly i believe) for 20 years after the war...begging the u.s. to let it back into the world community.
though 'communist' officially, they've got quite the little capitalist system going on, and they're begging vietnamese who left and started businesses to come back. long term, u.s. won.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno wow, so when the british got their asses kicked by the boers in three wars, and they SURRENDERED, does that make them 'surrendering cowards'?
or when they were driven out of kenya and israel? does that make them 'surrendering cowards'?
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 They didn't lose those wars they just had a tough time. The rest is what you call the 'end of empire' and this is something you are experiencing now. The main difference is that the British Empire lasted for 300 years and is the biggest empire the world has ever seen, whereas, the American version (a copy of the British model even using the same language and economic/legal system), lasted for 80 years and was pretty limited in its influence. You have to deal with your loss
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno no, britain LOST two of the three boer wars and LEFT s. africa.
i am not an empire, neither are you. why you feel bad about england being a second rate power is beyond me. you didnt colonize, nor did you profit directly from britains empire.
the american 'empire' one could argue started in 1898, and as it's still going (if one is to call it an 'empire') or 113 year.
the british were DRIVEN from kenya. period. israel, as 'peacekeppers', they were DRIVEN out. period.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 1898? Don't be silly. WWI America gained some power as the other countries had spent their wealth in wars but only really became a serious power during WWII, again for the same reasons. America has had it easy as you have not had any rivals (they were ravaged by war). Now China is in the lead (I bet they don't tell you that on that heavily censored American TV) so you only lasted for about 80 years. Look at the size of my country - aren't we amazing? Thank you.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno learn history. i said IF you're to say america had an 'empire', you have to go back to 1898, the spanish american war. the u.s. gained cuba and the phillipines. people considered that not only 'expansionist' but 'colonial'.
the u.s. AT THAT POINT became a world power.
whether the u.s. had it easy or not is besides the point.
china is in the lead as far as economy? yep. and thats why they dont want anything to happen to the u.s., as we're their biggest consumers.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 Cuba and the Phillipines is not the world my friend. What are the populations of those two countries?
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno actually...dominating the entire western hemisphere (after killing off the native americans) , then cuba in the caribbean with the phillipines in the far pacific...yeah that's pretty frigging huge.
your personal opinions simply don't matter. history says that u.s. expansionism and colonialism began in 1898 with the defeat of spain in the spanish american empire.
deal with it, kid.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 Well ours began several hundred years before and involved starting your country off too. BEAT THAT. By that the way, what's the name of the language we are communicating in? he he Come back when you've done something.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno 'we' didn't do anything ('we' including you and the rest of England).
you weren't born 'hundreds of years ago'. you can't take credit.
as you're likely born after world war 2, you weren't even born when the british empire was at its peak. even if you were, you didnt MAKE the empire.
you can't take credit for that which you did not do. get out of here.
fact is: you lived your whole life when britain was a second rate power.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 I now I understand why Americans don't understand the concept of history. Talking about your life-time, how did you get humiliated and defeated by little Vietnam?
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno The US was not defeated militarily in this war. In fact if US got it's assed kicked in this war, explain the casualties rates
The US lost 50,000 while the NVA/VC lost around 1,000,000. So it's proof that US kicked their asses militarily.
The US pulled out due to massive protests and the ARVN all need was the American air-support Congress chose to not fund it so technically the US lost support for ARVN so ARVN got defeated because al lthe need was air-support.
Hperman09 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno we speak modern english. i speak AMERICAN english, and you may speak the queen's english (though, given your ignorance, likely some gutter cockney).
doesn't matter...languages evolve, simp. english is a mish mash of latin, celtic, germanic languages, scandinavian, etc.
you trying to take credit for language that has been around for thousands of years before you were born? you ARE sad.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 Desperate response. How can you not have your own language and expect to be taken seriously?
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno you're simply blithering now.
is not modern 'english' based upon scandinavian/germanic, latin, and celtic? yes or no?
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 But you weren't born then and neither was your country. What about the humiliating defeat by little Vietnam?
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@truckerfromreno "But you weren't born then and neither was your country"
precisely. you're learning.
"What about the humiliating defeat by little Vietnam?"
what about your 'humiliating defeatS by a group guys (not even a 'country' for God's sake) called the 'boers' in two of three boer wars that ended up with britain being kicked out of s. africa? that had to hurt.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 ... he will never shut up and face the numerous facts you so handly shoved down his throat.. now you have the jack-ass grasping for straws on language origins...... haha well done...
timjessa1 7 months ago
@timjessa1 LOL...fun, isn't it?
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno i look at the size of your country and say '2nd rate, post colonial power'.
you're very welcome.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 Exactly, look at the size of our country and look how we lead the way. Aren't we amazing? It's time for you to face that you're also a second-rate, post-colonial power. We dealt with our loss and now it's your turn. Best wishes.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno well, nobody is calling the u.s. a second rate power NOW. what will happen in 10 or 20 years is anybody's guess.
TODAY america is still the only superpower. tomorrow china will share superpower status (unless their economy goes to crap, which is possible but not likely)....and england IS a 2nd rate power.
hurts you, doesn't it. you never got to live in england's power days, and i'm living in americans power days. bwahahahahaha
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
The French, Never won a war and only gave us a sloppy way to kiss.
bloodhoun138 8 months ago
nothing but a bunch of killers!
chihiromotoko 8 months ago
I hate the media for blowing the Tet offensive out of proportion on a strategic level.
hanzohadow 8 months ago
@hanzohadow ..i agree entirely or otherwise people at home would've realized we were winning the war still since we started and havent lost a battle to the nva and vc
MultiHeadbanger666 8 months ago
@MultiHeadbanger666 that's not entirely true...the u.s. MAY have lost one battle...the battle of Ong Thanh.
i say 'may' because out of 150 men of one company that was led into an ambush, 50 or so were killed and 75 wounded. many consider this a 'loss', but the nva had left the field before the americans, so many consider this either a 'draw' or a 'win' for the u.s.
it would be a 'win' like the battle of bunker hill...the americans left because they ran out of ammo, so a british win.
neoconsnightmare3 8 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 ...but the nva didnt leave because they ran out of ammo they left as a retreat due to thier own casualities also to stay alive or otherwise they would've died as well as their comrades..we held our ground despite being hit from a vicious ambush
MultiHeadbanger666 8 months ago
@MultiHeadbanger666 multi, agreed, but they left the field of battle first (for reasons of their own survivaland the survival of their wounded) just like the americans did at bunker hill (in that case they ran out of ammo).
you leave the field of battle first (as the nva did in ong thanh) and you 'lose'.
neoconsnightmare3 8 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 They lost loads and loads you mug. They LOST the war. Obviously your media doesn't tell you truth it never has and never will. For fucks sake you Americans even swallow the whole 9/11 cover story, you're just very guillable to the extent that you believe you only lost one battle in a long war in which you were defeated.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno the americans 'lost' 55,000 soldiers. how many did the north vietnamese and viet cong lose...oh yeah, 1.5 to 2 MILLION.
i'm not 'gullible' i'm factual. i know the americans lost the war...there was no strategy and they half fought the war.
they did, however, win all but one battle, and even that one, because the nva left the field first (for whatever reason) could be considered a win for the u.s. (though costly).
for fucks sake, why do you non americans get so jealous
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 You got fucked in the arse.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno 'fucked in the arse'? no, i'm not a british man.
LOL...okay, that was a cheap shot and i'd be stooping to your level.
sorry, i am not part of the u.s. government, was born the year the 'combat' part of the war started, and joined the military 12 years after the fall of saigon.
how exactly did i get 'fucked', much less 'anally'? or was that your way of telling the world what you like?
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 Roughly by a big Vietnamese penis.
truckerfromreno 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@truckerfromreno i asked you:
"or was that your way of telling the world what you like?"
and you responded:
"Roughly, by a big Vietnamese penis."
well, good for you. however, objectifying vietnamese men may not be the coolest thing in the world, but hey, that's your fetish.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@truckerfromreno i see now why you're so angry...you're from england.
ho chi minh himself didn't expect to win battles. he would just outlast the u.s.
they did expect to win tet, and found out that though 3,000 americans died, (4100 allies) but more than 44,000 vietcong died. after tet, the nva did all the fighting and the vietcong were essentially broken.
the americans werent the french, and the nva knew it. their job was to keep fighting, keep popping up. thats why they won.
neoconsnightmare3 7 months ago
@MultiHeadbanger666 one american officer wrote a book 'lost battle of vietnam' and there's a website that shows these examples.
HOWEVER, most of the 'lost battles' are real are really american 'wins' at a high price/cost in life/materiel to the u.s.
outside of ong thanh, all the others are :
'skirmishes' of the hit and run kind, like an attack on an airbase (not a battle, but a 'sapper' attack), or one platoon suffering huge losses but the brigade/battalion winning the battle.
neoconsnightmare3 8 months ago
great for my vietnam project
TheGreystoneGang 8 months ago
Comment removed
bloodhoun138 8 months ago
That 4 star GENERAL HAS BALLS OF STEEL!!!!....he was like...don't piss in your pants boys that was EOD....F-ing Awesome!
sgovea100 8 months ago
@joeylikeslots LOL.
neoconsnightmare3 9 months ago
So now you guy are blaming France for that stupid war ?
easterndragon9x 9 months ago
Anyone here know that the Tet Offensive was actually a great military victory for the US, but it was also a great POLITICAL victory for the communists? I guess the media "accidentally" messed up delivering that information. Damn liberal media.
moastytoasty54 9 months ago
@moastytoasty54 actually, i agree with you on tet. it was a military DISASTER for the viet cong (pretty much destroyed them, and from then on the north vietnamese fought the war). and it was a POLITICAL loss for the u.s., but then the whole war could be seen like that. ho chi minh even said we'll lose the battles, but win the war on the streets and living rooms in america.
however, it wasn't just the 'liberal media'. nixon ran on a 'victory with honor', meaning 'get the hell out'.
neoconsnightmare3 9 months ago
wheres the kamikazes and Hitler when ya need them??
HidanTheReaper1 9 months ago
GO VIETNAM!!
holytemplar 9 months ago
all becuause of funken greed.
MrBigtube17 9 months ago
this is incredible
stephenlockard 9 months ago
@ 2:35 You lying bastard!
calgarmaximus 9 months ago
@calgarmaximus actually, that was a military victory for the americans, but a huge moral defeat
iraqiblaze 9 months ago
1:40, Rafa Benitez?
rajan2389 10 months ago
Thanks so much for uploading these videos. I was a small child when this happened - interesting to see it as an adult able to understand it.
PKTrekGirl 10 months ago
The Press was the main reason America lost the war, the press didn't know when to keep out of their own business in Vietnam and still happens today but rarely
TheOnlGreatAlexander 10 months ago
@TheOnlGreatAlexander Yeah that's the only reason why we lost, because of the press. It's not because the communists had influence throughout the country before we were even fully involved or anything or because our military wasn't exactly suited for this kind of conflict. Nope it was the press.
Redgrant80 10 months ago
I make it in short, why you guy so interested in the war while every lost some thing? I changed my mind a bit today when I saw a movie, a South soldier take care of his comrades, a US marines cried for his friends and many Vietnamese people died, a Communist soldier cried around his friend corpses. Every one lost some thing in war. Why it still happen ? Today ? Some one said "In war, there are NO VICTORY, ALL LOST"
TheBaoAndro 10 months ago
It make me sick when those countries are trying to teach us "democracy" and "human rights" !
paiusan2000 10 months ago
The news footage back then was uncut almost. Way different than today.
mrfreeze0054 11 months ago
people should learn how to defend people not the building.... .
in war..you should save your people ,, not your material things...
ericsantiago011 11 months ago
The Brits blow up Germany in WW2, the Americans blow up the world, one piece at a time. that hardly seems fair.
Snipergod1024 11 months ago
RIP Col. Ripley. A great Marine! The trucks the NVA were using to convoy troops and munitions were Fords - made in a Soviet factory designed and built by the Ford Motor Company. The fuel that powered them came from Soviet oil fields developed by American interests with close ties to the Rockefeller oil cartel. Before any military action in Viet Nam could occur the US cleared it through the UN - whose military deputy was a Soviet General....
citizenfitz 11 months ago
Vietnam was a horrible war..I'm canadian but My father who's 62 knew some buddies of his who joined the American Military during vietnam,they never came back..
1988scottcarey 11 months ago
Reporters go without helmets....
haskapaska 11 months ago
@neymoura any race (not to mention judism is a religion) can try hard at succeeding and end up taking jobs from others because they are better at the job.
reubsdaddy 11 months ago
Gee dontcha wanna be a saudi arab king. Pay some poor bastard jews a few dollars and in return you get the u.s. navy, the air force... army and marines. They'll clean your house, stand outside your door and protect you from the devil, they just charge a little more. So HELL YES... I wanna be a saudi arab king. When I climb out of that learjet people gonna say.. wow.. what a peach. And I'm gonna laugh my way to the bank cause Im carrying your MO'NEY.
zintoit 1 year ago
Comment removed
zintoit 1 year ago
eeuu malditos invasores !!
tataso 1 year ago
Vietcong slaughtered 166 US Marines, movie : watch?v=plKRJXh0JuE
ottovonstierlitz 1 year ago
@ottovonstierlitz 58, get your facts right
s0Ez3 1 year ago
2:49
"The enemy has very deceitfully taken advantage of the Tet Truce"
Kubrick used this exact line in Full Metal Jacket.
Also, up the Vietcong.
TheVideoRepo 1 year ago
Wow, America FAILED in this war. I mean, they couldn't even defeat a bunch of blind people even though they used shit like napalm.
halipocoka 1 year ago
@halipocoka
But we fucked a lot of Pussy!!!!
tumsabai1 1 year ago
@tumsabai1 Damn right on that one
halipocoka 1 year ago
@halipocoka The universal congenital blindness of the Vietnamese people is not widely known. I'm glad you pointed it out!
In any case, the USA only "FAILED" (in preventing the conquering of South Vietnam) because the US (or elements in the government) deliberately chose to do so. The US did not "win" because they were unwilling, for moral and political, reasons to destroy North Vietnam by waging total war. Instead, the US chose to negotiate a peace and leave. Some think this was better.
jeselmira2 1 year ago
@halipocoka given your grasp of history is fairly loose, i'll be gentle.
the u.s. kicked all kinds of MILITARY ass in the vietnam war. the vietcong were all but exterminated after 'Tet', a battle they THOUGHT they would win (by popular uprising).
the north lost all major battles and medium battles. they MAY have won one skirmish.
bottom line: the u.s. chose the wrong (read that as WEAK) side. they should have supported ho when he asked for it and laughed at the french.
neoconsnightmare3 11 months ago
@neoconsnightmare3 I fucking well know about the Vietnam war you twat i just studied it in History 2 years ago. I just dislike the americans or moreover their stupid fucking tactics such as bombing and killing so many civilians thats why I'm criticizing them ffs.
halipocoka 11 months ago
@halipocoka my you curse a lot. inarticulate.
you 'disliking' americans is meaningless, given you're an effete little child with no power.
do you also hate the vietcong and northern vietnames, who tortured and killed people that didn't believe EXACTLY how they believed?
or the fact that the north vietnamese kicked out the chinese people that have been living in north vietnam (like my wife's family) for generations?
or is your impotent 'dislike' childishly misdirected only to the us?
neoconsnightmare3 11 months ago
@halipocoka it's a rough road and a stupid idea to generalize a large amount of people
TGram29 11 months ago