What is your opinion of the Vietnam War? Should we have gone in there?
465185
I am a Viet Nam veteran, serving with the First Cavalry Division in  the Central Highlands.  When I was there, in 1966-67, I supported what we were doing.  After I got home and studied the situation and what was happening in Viet Nam my mind was changed.  After Robert MacNamera apologized for the lies that got us into that war, I knew the US was wrong for going into the Nam.  The Domino Theory was a big fat lie.  We lost the war and I didn't see the whole area turning communist.  In fact Cambodia is a free nation know.  Viet Nam only wanted to be free from foreign domination which they finally achieved.  The US doesn't have the right to tell other countries what to do and how to live, but in todays world, might makes right so we interfer where we shouldn't
106646
We will come home from Iraq when the Iraqis are ready to take control of their own country and will not slip back into the way things used to be.  Anyone who thinks that as soon as a democrat becomes president, they will just end our efforts in Iraq is very mistaken.  So you people think that after the progress that we have made, we should just pull out now without completing the job?  Anyone ever heard of Vietnam?  The one war we weren't completely committed to?  And how does it compare with the other wars that we have been in and did the right way?  Which war do we look back on now with the most regret?  Vietnam, because we went in half-assed and lost thousands of soldiers for nothing.  Compare that with WW2 where we lost many more soldiers, but finished the job.
531152
Marcel has made some good points, with the exception of the ending of the Vietnam War in 1973. Recently, in a debate about 'Deep Throat,' Pat Buchanan had stated that President Nixon had authorized the 1973 pullout from Vietnam as a means of getting peoples' minds off of Watergate. It is very unlikely that the war effort would have been terminated when it did, because earlier President Nixon had placed some very severe conditions on American withdrawal, but in 1973 they were all abandoned.\n\nSpecifically, President Nixon had made the following demands on North Vietnam and the Viet Cong:\n\n1-All foreign combatants to be withdrawn from South Vietnam - instead, the US accepted 'certification' that NVA units in South Vietnam would stay in place and not continue to attack.\n\n2-All American servicemen listed as prisoners would be returned to the USA or relevant explanations provided - the US had maintained that 1500 American servicemen were missing and assumed alive and captured in Laos by either the Pathet Lao or the North Vietnames Army, but the USA agreed to instead list them all as dead.\n\n3-Verifiable cease fire to be in place before the USA would withdraw forces - the USA agreed to drop this condition altogether.\n\nThe Christmas Bombings, largely credited with bringing the North Vietnamese back to Paris, would have probably been continued (with subsequent continuation of loss of B-52 bombers over Hanoi) until North Vietnam actually made agreements they would stick to. The USA would then have kept faith with South Vietnam in 1975 when the next round of incursions began, and hippies would then have assaulted President Reagan in 1977 for reinstituting the draft and sending troops back to South Vietnam and invading the Peoples Republic of China. In 1981, discredited by new military deadlocks in Shanghai, President Reagan would have been followed by President Edmund Muskie, the economy would have collapsed 1n 1983, and in 1984 President Muskie would have benn succeeded by President Gus Hall, perennial candidate of the American Communist Party. In 1989, President Hall would have broken ties with Moscow and alligned the PRUSA (Peoples' Republic of the United States of America) with Albania and Yugoslavia as a third tier of World Communism. World War III would have ensued.
640689
Hate to tell you Navy Officer, there were no insurgents in Iraq bedore we got there.\n\nAnd your pious attitude about the death of American Soldiers for illigeyimate reasons is sickening. Pick up a rifle my man and jump on a land mine.\n\nAnd your Vietnam statements are even worse. I didn't see you there! Nixon Withdrew the troops.\n\nSource:\n15th Field Artillery Regiment\nWWI WW2 Korea Vietnam\nPanama Bosnia Iraq\nVietnam War Timeline\n"An individual's political beliefs depend on when\nhe became politically aware."\nAUTHOR UNKNOWN\n\n1970 - War Powers - By the time Congress learned that the naval incident leading to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (1964) had been misrepresented and moved to repeal the resolution in 1970, President Nixon had already shifted to another legal rationale -- his constitutional powers as "Commander in Chief" -- for his Vietnam policies. In its 1969 "national commitments" resolution, the Senate made a bid to reassert a congressional voice in decisions committing the US to the defense of foreign countries. The House passed war-powers measures in 1970, 1971 and 1972.\n27 Jan 73 - Official end of the Vietnam War.   Between 27 Jan and 29 Mar 73, a total of 587 military and civilian prisoners were released by the North Vietnamese, and during that same period, 23,500 US troops were withdrawn from South Vietnam\n29 Mar 73 - 67 more US P.O.W.'s were freed in Hanoi. The same day, the US withdrew its remaining 2,500 troops from South Vietnam. This date also marked the actual end of military involvement in Vietnam.\n10 May 73 - Due to continued bombing of Laos and Cambodia, the House voted (219-188) for the first time to cut-off Indochina funds\n31 May 73 - The Senate took strong action prohibiting the use of any funds appropriated by Congress to be used for combat activities in Laos or Cambodia\n7 Nov 73 - War Powers Act - Congress dealt President Nixon a stunning setback when it voted to override his veto of legislation limiting presidential powers to commit US forces abroad without congressional approval.   Congress, with the Vietnam War and the showdown over continued bombing in Cambodia behind it, was anxious to reassert its role in the conduct of the country's foreign affairs"\n\nYou have no idea of the total mess we have made in Iraq and in the world community.
944475
I was drafted for the Vietnam War.  They didn't call it a war then, they called it a "police action."   I asked, the same question, "WHY?"  \n\nI think the answer was, "Because we CAN."
818101
I think i know what you went through!..I spent 7 years in the Australian army, and did 3 tours to Vietnam!..Where i was then blown up 4 times by the Americans!..{mind you, they didn't discriminate, they blew each other up as well!}..But after 'demob' i found civilian life very difficult to fit back into!..I survived by going to university and getting a degree in Geology!..But i still found it hard to tolerate the odd thinking of civilians, did you notice that you didn't seem to fit in?..I wonder if this was just paranoia or what?..Many Vietvets just didn't handle it at all!..a lot went "bush" many commit ed suicide, others went insane!.Moving from one world into another so suddenly has to have some sort of effect on the unprepared mind, and i bet you were never prepared by the Army for it were you?.
1004714
ok mr HO was corect when he sed we could not in, granted we won almost every battle, but lets face it, we did nto know friend from fo, we did not know terain, we where to gung ho on, and we r like the world police, kenndy was killed to stop a war, LBJ revers the plain and decide to lanch the masive war in nam... such a wast, a sad wast....\n\nand u now Y we went to war in nam, for recorecs, he is or was a gr8 and wise person.
783246
Where the hell was i when we went back to Vietnam?!?!?!\n Trying to compare the Vietnam war to OIF is outrageously stupid. We went to into Vietnam because the french treated the Vietnamese like crap. As soon as we showed up the french jumped ship and left us high and dry then protested us being there. We got out of Vietnam war in 73. 75 is when Saigon fell. big difference, anyways  i digress. OIF happenede ecause saddam had al-queada training camps there. had his son uday purchase chemical weapons from the french and dutch. which he later used on the kurds. to assume that the vietnam war and OIF are the same is just retarded. Sam the communists stoped there take over of asia in vietnam. Research a thing called the domino effect.
234135
We should mind our own business!\n\nWe should never have been in Vietnam to begin with, it was a chemical corporation war that was intended to aid in the distribution of cocaine.  We should have learned from the French that we had no right to try to liberate them.  They did not want us in their country and we lost a lot of people because of a "politcal war" that should never have happened!\n\nThe one main objective of Iraq began with Osama Bin Laden and has escalated from there to rumors of weapons of mass destruction which have not been there since the 1990's when Bush Sr. was in office.  That was a war that should have been finished off but was never brought to an end and Hussein was then able to continue his wrath without having been brought to justice when he should have been paying for his crimes of war!\n\nThe main objective of Iraq was to gain control of their Oil and try to liberate the people of Iraq.  In the after affect of our actions as of thus, we have caused massive destruction to Iraq, their people and ours!  And you cannot change a culture that knows only one way and only accepts that way.  This is a war that we can never win.  America can never have prosperity without terrorism...which has been proven throughout the history of man.
935697
We'd STILL be in Vietnam.
834786
Vietnam-a complicated war. As a matter of fact, it wasn't called a war for years-it was a "police action" or "conflict". Not a lot of clear answers there.\n\nU.S. military advisors first became involved in Vietnam as early as 1950, when they began to assist French colonial forces. In 1956, these advisors assumed full responsibility for training the Army of the Republic of Vietnam or ARVN. Large numbers of American combat troops began to arrive in 1965 and the last left the country in 1973.\n\nPresidents involved were:\nHarry Truman 1945-1953\nDwight Eisenhower 1953-1961\nJohn Kennedy 1961-1963\nLyndon Johnson 1963-1969\nRichard Nixon 1969-1974\n\n American forces rose from 16,000 during 1964 to more than 553,000 by 1969. (Johnson). The irony here is we couldn't win that guerrilla war with 553,000  troops but thought 100,000 in Iraq would be plenty. Robert McNamara(then Secretary of defense) has since said he believed JFK would have ended the war has he not been assassinated in 1963.  I believe Democrats were a bit fooled by Johnson in that he fought strongly for great civil rights laws(he did do a lot there) back then but on the other hand escalated the war. It was easy for Democrats to believe he was a good man fighting the good fight. \n\n \n\nNixon had continuously campaigned under the slogan that he "had a plan to end the Vietnam War." (Peace With Honor)Unfortunately, no such plan existed and the American commitment would continue for another five years. The goal of the American military effort was now to buy time, gradually build up the strength of the South Vietnamese armed forces, and to re-equip them with modern weapons so that they could defend their nation on their own. This policy became the cornerstone of the so-called "Nixon Doctrine"\n\nSo Nixon finally pulled troops out but dragged his feet for years.Since he was elected largely because he promised to get us out of Vietnam, people were unhappy it took so long. I believe he finally did withdraw to get re-elected. He was re-elected for a 2nd term but resigned because of Watergate. (Watergate was unraveling during the campaign but most people didn't believe he was involved-thought instead it was a left-wing conspiracy). His Vice-President became President and pardoned Nixon soon after. \n\nIt was a tumultous time indeed. Robert Kennedy was assassinated in 1968 during his Primary run for President.\nThere was a lot of talk that he would certainly be President but \nRichard Nixon was instead. \n\nThere was a lot more to all of this and I'd encourage you to research more-a fascinating time, although very sad. History, politics and life seems interchangeable.
1169148
Well I spent 8 active with 2 tours and29 months in Korea and a year (1966-1967) in Vietnam and I know how you feel.\n\nMost of the ones you talk about are conservative, who's view were molded by the service. I remember when I thought the president could do no wrong! LBJ and Nixon. Robert McNamara and Gen Westmoreland. What a F___g crock they were!\n\nThey way I look at it is the shrills on here never served a day in the service, never saw combat, never ate c-rations for months. Don't suffer from PTSD or are dying from agent Orange.\n\nWe earned our right and as far as I am concerned we gave them theirs. Without us they wouldn't have a country to fight over, and sometimes I winder whether it was even worth it! From the day we got home we were treated like shi~! and it continues. They have no respect or self respect. They weren't worth the people on that black wall or the rest of us!\n\nThey don't vote, they don't serve, they don't say a damn thing while their freedoms are taken from them, or from others. All they do is blame it on the press and liberals.\n\nCan't be a Traitor, especially after what Bush has gotten away with being one, I can't believe people in the service or who were out would vote for a draft dodger.\n\nYou ignore those people. They hate everyone anyway. They don't talk issues, the spew venom. I wish I could take a few of them out to a hot LZ and leave them there!.\n\nIraq is wrong, Bush lied, we didn't go after the terrorism circumvented National law and are to this day. We went to war over greed and oil!\n\nBush's LATEST Lies!!! There are NO SECRET CAMPS and WE DON"T TORTURE!  Anyone believe him?? I can't believe one is in Poland!
544820
The primary mistake is the independant involvement of the media.  Vietnam was the first war that allowed "free reign" of the media, and the media's job is to sell it's copy.  So the real mistake made since Vietnam is allowing a reporter to see a small part of an operation, take it out of context of the whole, and twist it into something horrific to sell papers.
386013
I did serve on active duty for several years, and was honorably discharged.  Thanks to Ronald Reagan, most of my generation never saw war up close and personal.\nIt's a shame that yours did, thanks to Lyndon Johnson.  Since you were part and parcel of our involvement in Vietnam, I can understand why you are anti-war and lean slightly to the left.\nWe need to learn to pick and choose our battles with more care.  In the last 15 years or so, we have become militarily involved in a lot of places in the world that are not vital to our interests.\nWe should be the friend of freedom everywhere, but the guarantor only of our own.\nThis does not mean that we need to retreat from the world.  The "Pax Americana" does bring tangible benefits to the world, as did the "Pax Britannica" and "Pax Romana" before it.  But we don't have to be responsible for righting every wrong or curing every illness!  Take up the "White Man's Burden"?  No thanks, I'm not a racist!\nPresident Washington had it right: We should avoid entangling alliances.\n(P.S. Thank you for your service.  I'm pretty sure no one ever thanked you after you got back from Vietnam.  "Semper Fi" from an ex-Navy man!)
599917
While you were busy protesting ,my husband was probably in Vietnam, we had just had a baby girl two months before he left, he didn't see her again until she was over a year old.  I didn't like Nixon, didn't like the war, though supported it because my husband and many of our friends were in the middle of it.  I think most young people do start out more on the liberal side of things, and then LIFE HAPPENS TO YOU!   What bothers me with allot of the postings on Yahoo is that many of them don't seem to be thinking for themselves, and they sound so bitter and hate filled.  Maybe that's just part of the process, but I think it's rather sad.
235073
I was in Nam in 2001.  But too young for the war.\n\nMaybe you should go back and check it out now.  It might help put the past behind you.
702721
No.  I actually believe this war is going to be WORSE than Vietnam.  Our willingness to be mis led by ingorant politicians will have severe and long lasting consequences just in the maryiads of terrorists incubated by this invasion and occupation alone who want to hand us our heads.  Vietnamese are willing to move on and not seek revenge for generations to come.  Some of the people affected by the war in Iraq won't.