Was America's involvement in the Vietnam War justified?

[Ethel mermania]

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from communism in 1975? The only moral action would have been a lot more involvement.

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from the United States? North Vietnam was a popular revolution.

Vietnamese fleeing from the US? I don't know any Vietnamese who were in the US who went to vietnam.

[Adamede]

Not really. I mean, Vietnam was very far away from the United States. And the United States got pretty much nothing from the war expect looking very stupid afterwards and traumatizing it’s soldiers, all for what...eradicating..communism?
I can understand that because of the U.S being insanely capitalist in the 1950s and 60’s, and I know it engaged in international affairs even then, but couldn’t the U.S have used its resources on something else?

I suggest you read up on the Cold War my friend.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from communism in 1975? The only moral action would have been a lot more involvement.

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from the United States? North Vietnam was a popular revolution. Also, see the below post.

That justifies having two Vietnams. Let those who want communism go to communism Vietnam. Let those who don’t go to non-communist Vietnam.

[Page]

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from the United States? North Vietnam was a popular revolution. Also, see the below post.

That justifies having two Vietnams. Let those who want communism go to communism Vietnam. Let those who don’t go to non-communist Vietnam.

You realize the Viet Cong were from the South, right? They were all southerners who supported a united Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh.

[Monsone]

Many South Vietnamese also fled to the north as well.

This was less an ideological conflict and more an anti-colonial one. South Vietnam was going to lose whether or not we intervened on their behalf.

How was South Vietnam after 1955 a colony?!

It was heavily dependent on western and namely US aid and support to not get overwhelmed by its own population in an uprising and North Vietnam's military. Yes, South Vietnam wasn't a colony in that it wasn't part of a foreign nation, but it was very much beholden to the US and its allies.

[Cordel One]

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from the United States? North Vietnam was a popular revolution. Also, see the below post.

That justifies having two Vietnams. Let those who want communism go to communism Vietnam. Let those who don’t go to non-communist Vietnam.

That's not an option. South Vietnam was always going to lose, the US just prolonged the war. Also, the Vietcong were from south VIetnam because it was popular there.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from communism in 1975? The only moral action would have been a lot more involvement. The war should have been much shorter and much more decisive to minimize human cost.

At the end of a war, people who were part of the losing government generally try to get out of dodge because the winning faction tends to hold them accountable for the actions of the defeated government. This happens in basically every war. The Confederates fled at the end of the US Civil War, the nazis fled occupied Germany, Saddam's government all ran out of Baghdad in 2003, it's not a unique phenomenon of "fleeing communism."

It’s more than that. Lots of people who fled Communism were not in the gov. People justifiably flee from polities such as Mongol hordes, Nazis, communists, ISIS etc since they aren’t suicidal.

[Tsaivao]

Not really. I mean, Vietnam was very far away from the United States. And the United States got pretty much nothing from the war expect looking very stupid afterwards and traumatizing it’s soldiers, all for what...eradicating..communism?
I can understand that because of the U.S being insanely capitalist in the 1950s and 60’s, and I know it engaged in international affairs even then, but couldn’t the U.S have used its resources on something else?

A recurring pattern in American history is that we're willing to literally destroy everything if it means we get to say we're against socialism. It's quite a silly position, but we keep doing the same things today over and over.

[Page]

How was South Vietnam after 1955 a colony?!

It was heavily dependent on western and namely US aid and support to not get overwhelmed by its own population in an uprising and North Vietnam's military. Yes, South Vietnam wasn't a colony in that it wasn't part of a foreign nation, but it was very much beholden to the US and its allies.

Also it forced Catholicism on the population and brutally repressed Buddhism. That's what that burning monk was all about.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

How was South Vietnam after 1955 a colony?!

It was heavily dependent on western and namely US aid and support to not get overwhelmed by its own population in an uprising and North Vietnam's military. Yes, South Vietnam wasn't a colony in that it wasn't part of a foreign nation, but it was very much beholden to the US and its allies.

We agree on the nature of South Vietnam, namely it was a US-backed independent state. That does not mean it was illegitimate.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

It was heavily dependent on western and namely US aid and support to not get overwhelmed by its own population in an uprising and North Vietnam's military. Yes, South Vietnam wasn't a colony in that it wasn't part of a foreign nation, but it was very much beholden to the US and its allies.

Also it forced Catholicism on the population and brutally repressed Buddhism. That's what that burning monk was all about.

That was indeed a real problem. However US did not cause it. It was the incel Ngo Dinh Diem who did it. The Thieu regime was more moderate but similar to the Diem regime.

[Cordel One]

At the end of a war, people who were part of the losing government generally try to get out of dodge because the winning faction tends to hold them accountable for the actions of the defeated government. This happens in basically every war. The Confederates fled at the end of the US Civil War, the nazis fled occupied Germany, Saddam's government all ran out of Baghdad in 2003, it's not a unique phenomenon of "fleeing communism."

It’s more than that. Lots of people who fled Communism were not in the gov. People justifiably flee from polities such as Mongol hordes, Nazis, communists, ISIS etc since they aren’t suicidal.

Completely ignoring that people flee invasions by the United States and literally everyone else.

[Tsaivao]

What about the Vietnamese people who hurried to flee from the United States? North Vietnam was a popular revolution.

Vietnamese fleeing from the US? I don't know any Vietnamese who were in the US who went to vietnam.

Yes, because if I personally don't know anyone, then this MUST mean that no one actually did!

This is a very weird argument. People flee into North Korea all the time; hell, there are North Korean defectors who defected twice and went back into North Korea. Whose to say the same could not happen to Vietnam?

[Senkaku]

Many South Vietnamese also fled to the north as well.

This was less an ideological conflict and more an anti-colonial one. South Vietnam was going to lose whether or not we intervened on their behalf.

How was South Vietnam after 1955 a colony?! You are mistaking the First Indochina War from the Second.

The American ambassador's borderline-proconsular influence on the ostensibly sovereign Saigon government's decisionmaking and even its composition should at least raise doubts as to whether we can really characterize South Vietnam as fully decolonized (especially when you factor in the continued influence of Francified colonial elites in the government and the military right up to the end). No, it wasn't as formally under imperial control as it was under France, but...

[Cordel One]

Also it forced Catholicism on the population and brutally repressed Buddhism. That's what that burning monk was all about.

That was indeed a real problem. However US did not cause it. It was the incel Ngo Dinh Diem who did it.

The US supported it because blommunidm

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

It’s more than that. Lots of people who fled Communism were not in the gov. People justifiably flee from polities such as Mongol hordes, Nazis, communists, ISIS etc since they aren’t suicidal.

Completely ignoring that people flee invasions by the United States and literally everyone else.

Yup but different entities are not similar in brutality.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

How was South Vietnam after 1955 a colony?! You are mistaking the First Indochina War from the Second.

The American ambassador's borderline-proconsular influence on the ostensibly sovereign Saigon government's decisionmaking and even its composition should at least raise doubts as to whether we can really characterize South Vietnam as fully decolonized (especially when you factor in the continued influence of Francified colonial elites in the government and the military right up to the end). No, it wasn't as formally under imperial control as it was under France, but...

That’s a really funny definition of “colony”. Well, I guess Nigeria remains a British colony today, right? Not all post-colonial governments are established by anti-colonial fighters. Guess what? Countries such as Malaysia are legit too.

[Page]

Also it forced Catholicism on the population and brutally repressed Buddhism. That's what that burning monk was all about.

That was indeed a real problem. However US did not cause it. It was the incel Ngo Dinh Diem who did it. The Thieu regime was more moderate but similar to the Diem regime.

If Kermit the Frog commits a crime do you blame him or the puppeteer?

[Monsone]

It was heavily dependent on western and namely US aid and support to not get overwhelmed by its own population in an uprising and North Vietnam's military. Yes, South Vietnam wasn't a colony in that it wasn't part of a foreign nation, but it was very much beholden to the US and its allies.

Also it forced Catholicism on the population and brutally repressed Buddhism. That's what that burning monk was all about.

It wasn't just one monk. It was several. And you know you've lost a war when your own people are burning themselves to death, aiding the enemy, defecting to the enemy, or outright taking up arms against you.

[Cordel One]

Completely ignoring that people flee invasions by the United States and literally everyone else.

Yup but different entities are not similar in brutality.

The United States was significantly more brutal than the Vietcong and North Vietnam.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

That was indeed a real problem. However US did not cause it. It was the incel Ngo Dinh Diem who did it. The Thieu regime was more moderate but similar to the Diem regime.

If Kermit the Frog commits a crime do you blame him or the puppeteer?

You are assuming that SV was a puppet state. Well, this activity is clearly not caused by the US in the same sense that Soviets did not start Maoist atrocities. Diem was assassinated by US-backed generals precisely because Diem’s religious policies were so awful that they distracted from anti-communism to the point that even US couldn’t tolerate it.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

Also it forced Catholicism on the population and brutally repressed Buddhism. That's what that burning monk was all about.

It wasn't just one monk. It was several. And you know you've lost a war when your own people are burning themselves to death, aiding the enemy, defecting to the enemy, or outright taking up arms against you.

Yuppo. That’s because Diem was really a fundamentalist.

[Senkaku]

That was indeed a real problem. However US did not cause it. It was the incel Ngo Dinh Diem who did it. The Thieu regime was more moderate but similar to the Diem regime.

If Kermit the Frog commits a crime do you blame him or the puppeteer?

Not a good analogy for Diem. Yeah, we backed his regime, but part of the reason we subsequently got rid of him was because he was kind of an irascible cunt who wouldn't cooperate.

[Insaanistan]

The American ambassador's borderline-proconsular influence on the ostensibly sovereign Saigon government's decisionmaking and even its composition should at least raise doubts as to whether we can really characterize South Vietnam as fully decolonized (especially when you factor in the continued influence of Francified colonial elites in the government and the military right up to the end). No, it wasn't as formally under imperial control as it was under France, but...

That’s a really funny definition of “colony”. Well, I guess Nigeria remains a British colony today, right? Not all post-colonial governments are established by anti-colonial fighters. Guess what? Countries such as Malaysia are legit too.

Breaking News: Nigeria declares war on Nekostan-e-Gharbi. Polls by several independent agencies say the public is literally 100% behind it.

[Adamede]

That was indeed a real problem. However US did not cause it. It was the incel Ngo Dinh Diem who did it. The Thieu regime was more moderate but similar to the Diem regime.

If Kermit the Frog commits a crime do you blame him or the puppeteer?

If you’re talking about a puppet in a figurative sense, than Kermit and the puppeteer.