Author Topic: Senate majority leader: Iraq war is LOST (Read 4344 times)

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #75 on:** April 20, 2007, 03:59:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001

almost everyone living now in Iraq has lived under a dictatorship, they do not know how to govern themselves, we must show them how.

How noble of us. And I'm guessing that within every Iraqi is an American waiting to get out?

ack-ack

AquaShrimp · « **Reply #76 on:** April 20, 2007, 04:02:04 PM »

Two years after we pull out of Iraq, Iran will invade and stabilize the region. We wont trade with them for 20 years, then they will become our friends, just like Vietnam.

Anyone willing to take that bet?

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #77 on:** April 20, 2007, 04:09:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
Virgil Hilts, quit trying to sneakily change what I said.

I said VIETNAM. Not SOUTH EAST ASIA. The massive blood-bath happened in Cambodia. Ironically, it was communist insurgents who were just waiting for the Cambodian government to become weakened to rise up and strike. The Cambodian government became weakened trying to assist the U.S. by striking the North Vietnamese.

So the massive bloodbath never happened in Vietnam. There were a few executions, but most people, even those that cooperated with the U.S., were allowed to assimilate into the new communist rule.

No, there was a blood bath afterwards as the NVA took revenge on those that supported the South. Those in the South that had any relationship with the US or the West were either imprisoned and sent to "re-education" camps or executed. I think it was just a few years ago that Vietnam finally released its last South Vietnamese POW that was imprisoned for over 30 years.

ack-ack

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #78 on:** April 20, 2007, 04:12:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
I have to say I think that statement is falsified. Tokyo Rose would have spelled Emperor correctly.

The really ironic thing about your statement is that it was the North-Vietnamese who, after winning the war against the US and South-Vietnam, ended Pol Pot’s reign of terror in 1978.

Don't forget they also went to war with China over Cambodia and won.

ack-ack

john9001 · « **Reply #79 on:** April 20, 2007, 04:38:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
How noble of us. And I'm guessing that within every Iraqi is an American waiting to get out?

ack-ack

to quote the song "people everywhere just want to be free"

AquaShrimp · « **Reply #80 on:** April 20, 2007, 05:27:57 PM »

Ack-Ack, if you want to believe there was a big bloodbath in Vietnam in 1975, go right ahead. But I have it on good authority (along with multiple published sources) that there WASN'T.

The big bloodbath was in Cambodia under Pol Pot's regime. The Vietnamese reunited, and besides a few executions and some standard re-education, things went back to normal.

The biggest complaint I can find is that officers in the South Vietnamese Army claim that there is a 'glass ceiling' that prevented them from rising to the top positions on society in post-war Vietnam. How would they be there to complain if they were supposedly executed as you say?

Toad · « **Reply #81 on:** April 20, 2007, 05:39:29 PM »

Aqua, how many would it take for you to call the post NV victory a "big bloodbath" then?

x0847Marine · « **Reply #82 on:** April 20, 2007, 05:52:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Aqua, how many would it take for you to call the post NV victory a "big bloodbath" then?

Technically to bathe in a tub of blood would require what?, 20 or 30 gallons? so a "bloodbath" could be easy to achieve without killing all that many people... see?

john9001 · « **Reply #83 on:** April 20, 2007, 06:15:43 PM »

"besides a few executions and some standard re-education, things went back to normal. "

oh boy , talk about the spin

Gumbeau · « **Reply #84 on:** April 20, 2007, 06:24:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
"besides a few executions and some standard re-education, things went back to normal. "

oh boy , talk about the spin

Executions are when they shoot you without asking you to join the Communist Party.

Re-education is when they shoot you after they ask you.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #85 on:** April 20, 2007, 06:38:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by x0847Marine
Technically to bathe in a tub of blood would require what?, 20 or 30 gallons? so a "bloodbath" could be easy to achieve without killing all that many people... see?

A shower might take less, unless you are into really long luxurious blood showers.

But a quick douse and rinse, only a couple of gallons, maybe three.

Viking · « **Reply #86 on:** April 20, 2007, 06:45:36 PM »

So they shot collaborators and a few ”enemies”. So what? Hardly a “bloodbath” compared to the war itself. The French and other European countries also shot collaborators after being liberated in WWII, but I’ve never heard it described as a “bloodbath” before. And comparing it to the killing-fields of Cambodia is just dumb.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #87 on:** April 20, 2007, 06:53:44 PM »

Aquashrimp, From what i've read about post-1975 Vietnam, was that in the years after the war, the government in the North not only "purged" all of the old SV government from the top, all the way down to teachers in grade schools, they also did in the former Viet Cong allies.

If what I've read is correct, the Northern Government was afraid of a Counter-revolution, which would be spearheaded by many of the former guerillas.

Yes, The genocide of the Pol Pot regime was worse...but there was quite a bit of killing after 1975, in Vietnam.

However, I would point out, that although Vietnam and Iraq are similiar on the outside, they are completely different on the inside. Really, trying to compare the two(other than both resulting in long-term U.S. involvement)is extremely diffucult. Your guess that Iran might Invade is a good one...But they will probably wait until things are favorable. 2 years might be a bit optimistic. However, With our fuel crisis, Not trading with them for 20 years(That would include Iran, as well as any other inclined nation in the region) Would probably be out of the question. We simply could'nt withstand being cut off of that much oil for that long. Especially since it would be fueling the Chinese, N.Koreans, etc. The economic implications are too big.

john9001 · « **Reply #88 on:** April 20, 2007, 07:42:55 PM »

news from the front.

"U.S. officers say a growing number of Sunni tribes are turning against al-Qaida, repelled by the terror group's sheer brutality and austere religious extremism. The tribes are competing with al-Qaida for influence and control over diminishing territory in the face of U.S. assaults, the officers say. The influx of Sunni fighters to areas outside the capital in advance of the security crackdown in Baghdad may have further unsettled the region.

"This is a big turning point," U.S. Maj. David Baker said Friday in the Diyala provincial capital of Baqouba. "If they are fighting against each other, it's better than them fighting against us."

oh yes, we are "losing the war", Reid needs to stop whining and get a pair.

how do these losers get elected?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #89 on:** April 20, 2007, 07:45:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
First of all you didn’t hear me say “it”, you read what I wrote. Any perceived “tone” in my previous post is purely a figment of your imagination and personal bias. Secondly, you did lose the Vietnam War. How and why you lost the war is a discussion better suited for a separate thread.

We "lost" the political will at home. So we quit. We pulled out.
there was no surrender. Bit of a difference between loosing and quitting

NV was on the ropes at one point. It was even admitted so by a NV leader.
thee interview was posted on these boards I beleive some time ago.
This was what forced the NV to the barganing table.

And after we quit the NV didnt just control South Vietnam.
the last american combat troops left Vietnam in March of 73.
The war didnt end for another two years
When the NV captured Saigon in April of 75
A little over two years later.