![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nope. The historical record categorically confirms the
fact that LB II won the VN war That same "historical record" says the 8th Air Force bombing missions into Germany destroyed the Germans war making capability. That "fact" has been disproven countless times. They had a choice: return to the Paris talks with a fortright attitude toward peace, or return completely to the stone age at home. You sound like LeMay. You do realize they already were in the stone age right? Tell me, what critical infastructure did we destroy during LB II that wasn't already operating at less than 25%? For the very first time, the N. Vietnamese approached the talks with something other than deceit and delay in mind: their continued survival. Wrong. They had already agreed to the same document in October '72 that they did in January '73. Linebacker I and the Freedom Porch missions proved to the NVN that ARVN ground forces and U.S. Air power could, quite effectively, prevent their conquest of SVN. The solution; sign a Peace Accord removing the U.S. from the picture, which they agreed to in October '72 and had it not been for SVN President Nguyen Van Thieu's refusal to publicly "ok" the deal (I don't believe he had to sign anything as SVN was not a participant in Paris), LB II would never have been required. NVN was not fighting for their survival *ever* during that conflict. Their industrial base was barely existant in 1964, they counted on imports from China and the Soviet Union for everything except rice and since we never took real measures to cut off their imports (mining of Haiphong harbor in 1972 was like closing the barn door after the horses got out), their existance was never threatened...even during LB II. Academics can revise history as much as they want There's no doubt that this does occur, but not in this case. You could prove your point simply by providing some sort of proof that the bombing during LB II was causing such damage that the NVN government feared they would be defeated if it did not stop. Far too many direct participants (and individuals extremely interested in then-current events) survive to permit them to push their "inspired by a true story" fiction on an unsuspecting public. While I was only 4 at the time, you can consider me one of your; "individuals extremely interested in then-current events". In fact, nearly every one in the USAF should be interested in getting the real scoop on LB II, because learning the wrong lesson is often worse then not learning a lesson at all.... BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Friendly fire" | Mike | Military Aviation | 0 | March 19th 04 02:36 PM |
B-52 crew blamed for friendly fire death | Paul Hirose | Military Aviation | 0 | March 16th 04 12:49 AM |
U.S. won't have to reveal other friendly fire events: Schmidt's lawyers hoped to use other incidents to help their case | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 18th 03 08:44 PM |
Fire officer tops in field — again | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 13th 03 08:37 PM |
Friendly fire pilot may testify against wingman | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 11th 03 09:32 PM |