Is it true that more bombs were dropped on Laos than Vietnam?
962556
You might be surprised to learn that many of us that were in Vietnam in the early 60s thought that the conflict in Vietnam was a little deal, and that Vietnam would be used as a staging aria for war against Laos. At that time Laos was in far more danger of falling to the domino theory than was South Vietnam.
429878
In January, 1968 (I think) the North Vietnamese Army along with the Viet Cong launched an offensive against US and South Vietnamese positions throughout South Vietnam on the holiday of Tet.  While the offensive was a military disaster for the NVA & VC, it so rattled the American public that the anti-war effort got the impetus it needed to eventually cause the US to abandon Viet Nam.
549002
They are not unrelated. However, prior to the invasion of Iraq, AQ and the Taliban were indirectly linked to Saddam's regime. Saddam supported terrorism and anti-US movements in general, rather than specifically focusing on the advancement of Osama bin Laden and the agenda of the Taliban or AQ.\n\nRecent activity in southern Afghanistan can partly be linked to increased Taliban activity (which usually spikes following the spring thaw of the ice covering mountain passes), and partly to tribal infighting and territorial disputes among drug smugglers. As NATO extends its forces into southern Afghanistan, the violence will most likely spike and then subside as arrests are made and terrorists, criminals and warlords are killed during the offensive and battles among themselves.\n\nThe technology being used is not necessarily more advanced. What has improved (unfortunately) are the tactics being employed both in Iraq and Afghanistan. Terrorists, insurgents and drug smugglers are learning from operational successes and failures and are adapting techniques and placement and amount of explosives in a more efficient and unfortunately effective manner. Insurgents have begun using shaped charges more effectively to focus the blast pattern, which makes the explosion more deadly for the victim.\n\nLong way of saying I agree with your point that AQ and the Taliban were connected, at least indirectly, to Saddam.
83693
more than  who actually admit it
85427
Not as many as we lost in the war.
213033
The key difference is that there was no moral justification for our invasion of Vietnam.  We betrayed ourselves and not unlike Iraq entered into a war of choice based on false evidence. \nIn WWII, there actually was a REAL enemy who declared war on the United States from Asia and Europe .\nWW II was winnable, Vietnam was not. Both were costly, only one war was the US right to be involved in.  It was not Vietnam.
833852
Another Myth Buster!  The British did help the US in the Vietnamese war.  Their help was secretative.  And until recently (late 2005) those documents were classified.  See story: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=74&ItemID=9837
568179
Let's verify there was a massacre before we make any comparisons. Since Vietnamese villagers were not known for blowing themselves up to kill U.S. personnel and few if any of their women were ever combatants, shooting down civilians in that theater was a lot more difficult to take than anything that happens in a war zone where women and children routinely take up arms, put on disguises and attack both military and civilian targets.\n\nAs for Calley, I don't think Nixon went overboard in granting him clemency. He was being scapegoated.
757959
Both threats are as real as you are. To the lady that wanted proof of the Commies intent in the 60's, I'm guessing you weren't around at the time. I was. The whole World was scared that both the US and the USSR would destroy the World to destroy each other. The threat was definitely real. You want proof? Do a search on the Bay of Pigs.
233609
Cute_Blondie seems to have a pretty thorough answer there.  My question is do you mean the Vietnam War that the US fought in or is there another war called the Vietnamese War?
441088
There were 765 POWs released and 36 escaped.  For a detailed breakdown, visit the Vietnam POW homepage below.  Go to the POW statistics section for the numbers.
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
927641
i do not think so,I hope we learned our lesson from back in 1860-1864. there were more soldiers killed in it,than all the other wars combined. at least up yo Viet Nam .
109101
I would venture to guess they did not want a show down with the Soviet Union or China at the time. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was enough to justify escalating the war without a declaration.  You would think that sending 50,000 amercian boys and soldier girls to their deaths would've justified a declaration of war, but who am i to raise that argument.
1097073
Interesting that you ask this question because very few knew that the U.S. was with a coalition of forces in defending South Vietnam. Answer #1 is correct with 520 total deaths out of a force of 7,672 (http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/statistics/vietnam.htm), which equates to 6.8% of their total force being killed in Vietnam. By comparrison 10.6% of the total U.S. forces had died in Vietnam. \n\nThat is astounding considering that the Australians did not rely on artillery or air strikes when they engaged with the Viet Cong or NAV forces. The Aussies used ground maneuvers when engaging the enemy, just like the Viet Cong and NVA, and were very well respected by their enemy.
65298
Hi there.  I'm military, and I don't have any trouble seeing the parallels between the two. First, Viet Nam was a morally ambiguous war.  Lots of people thought we shouldn't have been there in the first place, and lots of people believed that our actions were doing more to prolong the war and harm the population than allowing the Communists to take over would have.  The enemy we fought was basically a guerilla force that used asymmetric warfare.  The management of the war was criticized as being (at times) militarily inept as well as fiscally wasteful.  Then, as now, there were unconvincing official pronouncements of progress from the administration's spin doctors. (How many times have we heard about the insurgency being played out, or that we had turned the corner, or that they were "on their last legs" as Dick Cheney said last summer?)  Then there's the whole sense that the war could drag on year after messy year without any clear hope of victory.      \n\n\nThere are, of course, important differences. In Viet Nam, there were front lines.  The enemy had territory, and they were far more numerous and cohesive than the Iraqi insurgency is.  The Viet Cong were an army, even if their hit hard then melt away tactics seem superficially like the Iraqi insurgents'.  US soldiers were largely draftees that did not want to be in the service at all, unlike our all-volunteer servicemen today.
493783
You are absolutely correct.  In Vietnam we used to watch the unique smoke spirals from the charcoal fires the Vietcong would use to cook their breakfast at dawn.  We could tell by the number of spirals how many troops where in that particular geographic area and take the appropriate action.  Believe it or not, we could also tell by the amount of urine vapor that would float into the air at dawn how many enemy troops where also in that particular geographic area and take the appropriate action.  I can't say any more since it is still classified. You would be amazed at the level of technology that is in use today.