sharkone wrote:

How many think we won in Viet Nam?Lost?


What was the score in Vietnam? If you can tell me what the final score was,
then I'll tell you if we won or lost. Don't forget to tell me what metrics
and
methodology you employed to determine that score. eg. national objectives,
political objectives, military objectives, etcetera.

Can you reply with this information by tomorrow?

According to people in both the Kennedy and Johnson aministrations, the reason
we fought in SE Asia (initially espoused by Kennedy in our support for the
Laotian government) was to prevent all of South Asia from coming under
communist rule and seriously threatening our position in the Pacific. We wound
up "losing" South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, but interestingly enough none of
these "losses" had any direct impact on our position in the Pacific. The
tragedy of Cambodia combined with the mistrust between communist nations
prevented the "domino effect" from taking over more than SE Asia, and then only
temporarily in the case of Laos and Cambodia. Can we attribute U.S. military
involvement in SE Asia to the failure of the "domino effect"? Tough question.
Surely the damage inflicted by the US on North Vietnamese and VC forces had an
impact on their ability to project power beyond its borders circa 1974, but
sociological factors contributed as well. Vietnam had border conflicts with all
its neighboring (and fellow communist) nations in the years immediately
following its victory so a "pan communist Asian revolution" seemed unlikely.
The question posed here is a tough one and one that probably doesn't have an
answer that can be explained on a single (or dozen) usenet posts.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"