"Fat Electrician- we didn't lose Korean War" | Kip Reacts to Unsubscribe Clips 

My grandpa is a Vietnam vet as an airborne ranger. The day his ship arrived back to America he and his squad where met with a protest. He was somewhere between 18 and 20 years old at the time. He got off and the first thing that happens after being through so much trauma? A woman spits on him. He immediately decked her and ended up in jail bit not for very long. I love my grandpa, he is a good man and he didn't deserve that.

If people want to say that America and South Korea lost the Korean War, then by the same logic, North Korea and Communism lost too.

Honestly, I wish they taught more of this in school. When it comes to Vietnam, it was basically taught that we pulled out due to political pressure. It was never taught that we literally forced them to sign a peace treaty, then left as we agreed to do, then years later the North Vietnamese re-invaded. The political pressure is why we didn't go back and help the South Vietnamese after they were attacked years later like we told them we would do if the North Vietnamese violated the peace treaty. The fall and evacuation of Saigon was mostly the evacuation of civilian diplomats and refugees; by that time, we had withdrawn almost all of our presence in the region due to the peace treaty.

The amount of people who will claim "Oh the US lost in Korea! Oh the US lost in Vietnam! Oh the US lost in the middle east!" without actually knowing anything about those conflicts is genuinely frustrating to me. Like, it's right up there with calling the US a democracy as far as my pet peeves go. Just an immediate "so you have no clue and this is going to be frustrating, got it."

I don’t think I have ever heard of American losing the Korean War, at the very least it was a stalemate not a lost.

Military Battles we won, but when it came to politicians in Vietnam it made many ask "Are they gonna let us win this time ?" Korean War: Military Victory, Political Compromise Vietnam War: Military Victory, Political Loss And another described Vietnam War like this "America won first by a landslide and forced the North Vietnamese to sigh a treaty, But then the North Vietnamese break the treaty three years later"

All combat troops were withdrawn in March 1973 from Vietnam. The only Americans who were there during the Fall of Saigon in April of 1975 were diplomats, capped at 350 personnel. There were Marines there, as embassy guards. Not even a full company. The only other US troops on the ground during the evacuation were a task force tasked with getting those diplomats out. 2 embassy guards were killed during the evacuation by indirect rocket fire. Everyone else got out.

I look at Vietnam like this partially modifying one of the examples in the Video. America defended South Vietnam and forced North Vietnam to sign a peace treaty. However, 3 years later North Vietnam went back and beat up South Vietnam when America was back at home and not in a position to do anything about it.

Quick thing to mention is that Jack's point is that Americans still died and were in Vietnam, but he's seeming to ignore something very important. The only Americans who died were people working in the Embassy. We didn't have any active operations or anything, just an embassy. The only Americans in Saigon during the fall were either Vacation people (probably idk) and Embassy workers, not a full military operation.

Korea, in my eyes and how it was taught to me, is just a 70 year pause on a war for a majority rule for a peninsula. Vietnam seems to be a resolution and one side deciding to disregard the agreed upon resolution to get what they wanted in the first place.

11:05 EXACTLY!! And we were not involved in Game 2. It was like this. Somebody online was insulting your friend, so you take the controller and obliterate this kid. Then next week, kid claims he was the winner of game 1 because he came back and beat your friend in a seperate game.

Jack Mandiville is hilarious and actually a lot smarter than most people assume because he looks like a hillbilly. Also he is an ex-marine (his words not mine).

Nic was really drunk in this episode so he didn't really explain his points that well but there is a clip of more recent podcast where he explains the Vietnam War a lot better

Statistically speaking if I'm not mistaken it was like an embassy or a base that you would see another places like Germany and such during the time period that was left that needed to be evacuated 3 years after the war ended.

What i love about fat electrician is his planing to go to school to be a licensed historian to write books of history

When it comes to the Fall of Saigon, the only US personal in the country were at the embassy. We didn't have any bases on which to operate out of. This is why helicopters were picking up people off of apartment roof tops.

The main reason why the U.S. withdrew from Vietnam was because of the Watergate fiasco and Richard Nixon want to try to get as much attention off of him as he could. If either the guys, under the orders of Nixon, hadn't have gotten caught or if Nixon wasn't facing such potentially serious repercussions, then we would have easily spent another 18 months as we were already gradually withdrawing.

I look a win or loose via the objectives and goals. If you complete 8/10 objectives and meet 7/20 goals, it's a hard fought win, for example. There's a lot that goes into deciding (even for the military) what a win is.

You always gotta ask what are your end goals and victory conditions. Sometimes one or both might change. It's also fair to say win or loss isn't always the appropriate way to describe it. A stalemate can be a viable end goal. Sometimes you achieve some goals and not others. Well said by you and FatElectrician at the end there.

11:00 minutes, basically Colby vs masvidal. Colby won the sanctioned bout and masvidal snuck him on the street after the fight.

This episode was a spicy one and phenomenal for it

It is one of 3 episodes that I think all should watch or listen to in full length

I think.one of the roots of this is a behaviorial phenomenon you can observe in individuals who have a high "success rate" in a given field or area. I don't want to call it "dunning kreuger", but I believe that term is related, or useful to consider. As someone who is good at rhythm games, I have an awareness that there are people who are MUCH better than I am. I can articulate why I am not "the best". And if I am in a conversation that involves me being good at rhythm games, I can come across as deprecating myself unnecessarily. Someone who is trying to compliment me is hearing the "humbleness" as "humble bragging". I think American historical revisionism has at least one of its roots in this phenomenon. We are so wildly successful at war and global politics that it makes some other countries hate us or make fun of us just to get some jab in. And I think this phenomenon of deprecating yourself is a sort of defense mechanism or bad coping mechanism. Here's the catch: This behavior outright does not work at the scale of human society. Global politics. National and cultural identity does not speak as an individual: It's a collective. And when individuals try to enact this behavior on a societal level, it gets twisted. You go from humbling yourself to actually believing that America is the loser and the bhole and whatever derogatory concept.

Whole problem is history was written by a bunch of people who have no idea what the situation was or what those soldiers went through. Then so many people of my generation (born 1998) and beyond don't question or think about that part of history. My grandfather (paternal) served in Korea, not sure about Vietnam but definitely Korea, and he never would talk about what happened or what he went through. All he would say is he did whatever he could to make sure he and his buddies made it back home. History may be written by the victors, but its also written by idiots

My friend was in 10th Mountain in somalia for bhd, mission accomplished. They got the people they were going after🫡

11:25 I think it’s more like if you win the 1v1, you both agree to get off for the night and that you win, but then as you open your menu to leave he eliminated you with a cheap shot to tie up the score and says he won after you left.

America won the 1st war with SV as their ally and left, America wasn't involved in the 2nd war and SV lost. We knew SV couldn't win on their own, partially because NV wasn't alone, just as we knew NV wouldn't honor the deal and left SV to die because of "scapegoat of choice". Could we have done something? Probably. Should we have done something? Probably but also hard to say.

In every war America fought, they either won, ended it in a draw, or were forced to leave. And a victory by default may technically be a victory, but it’s not true victory

I've never really heard of the Korean war as a loss, but rather as a stalemate. In reality, we really kicked North Korea's butt so bad that they were completely out of the country and into China. The only reason they were able to come back is because #1 China entered the war and #2 the US higher up's didn't give the okay to blow the bridges between NK and China. One of my grandparents fought in that war and when his chemical company was dug in at the Yalu River, sometimes the river would freeze over and the remnants of the NK army and Chinese troops would start charging. He said that it didn't matter where you aimed, even if you hit the ice it would ricochet up and hit an enemy that's how numerous they were, but their morale would break half way and they'd start retreating, leaving their wounded and dead on the ice and when the river thawed it would naturally take away the wounded and dead left out there. He had quite a few other stories as well, but this post will be long enough as it is. Vietnam could be maybe considered a loss based on objectives. Sure the US had a way higher kill death ratio, but that doesn't always translate into victory. It mostly came down to the will to fight, and unfortunately there were a lot of political things going on in the mainland. Some of it obviously being anti-war sentiment, which is fine and normal, but there was also a lot of communist infiltration in the US institutions in the 50's, especially colleges, that was just starting to bear fruit in the 60's and really spur on a lot of the protests and sentiments. Said infiltration is stronger than ever and normalized today. Afghanistan... That was not only just a surrender at the end, but it was sabotage or at best was inept. At risk of being political, Trump had the withdraw set up as it should have been and promised support for the government and military forces as they needed it. As soon as Biden took over, he cut all support. No supplies to the FOBs that could only get resupplied by air, and 6 months of attrition they just randomly pull out, leaving our own people and our allies, and billions of dollars worth of high tech equipment behind. Afghanistan would have held just fine if those supplies were provided as was promised, but the US broke its word. Then the main stream media on the left and the right used it all as an excuse of "Oh, we just failed, we're such losers and we wasted 20 years and american lives and tons of equipment for nothing. Hearts and minds campaigns obviously don't work." meanwhile said hearts and minds ended up getting crushed and ground to bits as they were trying to climb the landing gear of the planes trying to escape. Kill death ratio isn't everything in war, especially if your country doesn't care about how many losses they have. Russia is losing troops about 6:1 last I heard in Ukraine but they don't really care as long as they're gaining territory. In some cases it's beneficial for Russia to have such a high loss rate. Many of the losses are from penal companies, which means they got rid of a tax burden that was just sitting in jail. In addition to that, they end up claiming a large number of their losses either weren't actually lost or that they were gay and spreading diseases among the army so they don't get their soldier's death benefits and if their remains are obtained, they're typically destroyed in disgrace.

18:45 The banks win

Is America perfect? Freaking no. But, this is the greatest country God has ever given man. Despite its problems.

TFE reasonably argued that political revisionism of history is a very insidious problem. People coming after the fact and straight up contradicting the facts with opinions only and doing it to the point that they bury the actual truth is incredibly corrosive to the nation. It devalues the sacrifices made to get us to where we are today.

Another completely forgotten point by alot people these days, we most certainly didn't start nor where we on the ground when the Vietnam War started, first UN forces on the ground where the French, thats a point that most certainly was taught back when i was in school, currently 35, but seems to have been completely left out in more recent years.

11:29 I think its more you and your buddy are on a team for a game and you both dominate. A few days later your buddy doesn't see you online so he says "screw it" and plays alone and gets stomped harder than a turd in a shower drain. Did you lose because you had something up and you couldn't help your friend?

Where I can see where he is coming from. I agree with Kip it's about what your objectives going in and what you get down before coming out. If our goal going in was to prevent the South falling, then that failed even if it was because the north didn't follow the treaty. Going into WW2 our goal was unconditional surrender which we achieved on both fronts. Korea keep the South independent we did. But when you go in with vague arbitrary goals it makes it more up for i my interpretation about who "Won" and there doesn't have to be a winner there can be two losers on a war. If Russia and Ukraine right now signed a peace treaty who "won"? Ukraine is still independent which Russia wanted to overthrow the government but Russia has conquered huge portions of Ukrainian land, but they want to stop NATO expansion only to cause two more countries to join NATO and further isolated themselves from the rest of the world. I wouldn't can either side a winner both sides have lost more than they gained.

Swear politics should eff off once they send Military out to do its business. It never ends well and prolongs how long they are in a conflict zone

My issue is that if he’s using the argument that we won the Korean War because we achieved our objective of keeping South Korea democratic, then if you use the same logic we definitely lost Vietnam. Communism was not contained, South Vietnam fell to the North, and our actions in the region also led to Cambodia and Laos becoming communist and the Khmer Rouge committing a genocide that killed what amounts to 25% of the population of Cambodia. In what way is that an American victory? And if you’re gonna argue that we only lost because of political instability at home, that’s still irrelevant because it doesn’t change the outcome. That’s like saying “If Russia left WW1 before the Revolutions that wouldn’t have been a defeat because they’re only leaving because of the political unrest and they’ll get everything they lost back when America joins and beats the Germans.” If they’re leaving because of political unrest, it doesn’t change the fact that they’re leaving the war in a situation that is worse than when they started. Especially when the political unrest is a direct result of that war.

The Korean wars original goal was to save Korea they moved the goal post to saving south Korea when they saw they could not win this war He is wrong when it comes to this America China and the UN did loose that war thees three factions gave up the Korea war is still going a cease fire is not an end to a war

The UN which was led by Americans, won the First Phase of the Korean War in that they beat back the North Koreans and saved South Korea. They lost the Second Phase when they Invaded North Korea and were pushed back by the Chinese all the way back to Busan. They were able to win the Third Phase and pushed the Chinese back to the 38th Parallel which remains the defacto boarder today. Pyrrhic Victory at best and tens of thousands of troops died for no reason. In regard to the Vietnam War. America won a Military Victory but lost the will to fight. As such they lost the Social Victory and as such withdrew at the earliest opportunity. It was unequivocally a loss. Afghanistan was won but then they spent twenty years dealing with an insurgancy and when Joe Biden Surrendered the country with his disasterous pullout they then lost that won as well. The only wars that the US could claim to win are the Yugoslavian Wars and the First Gulf War. But even then they had major help during those conflicts.

Of course not, because my grandfather fought in it and he never loses

The "loss" that people are talking about is a conflict we weren't even involved in. We won the war. Then the loser beat up the dude we defended 3 years after we left. Regardless of how people feel about it, every measurable metric of war says we won. Was it morally wrong? Probably. Should we have been there? Probably not but they wanted help. There are plenty of grey areas surrounding Vietnam's before and after effects. But the black and white area is clear, during the conflict that we were involved in, we won. Our goal was achieved. Stop communism from taking over the country. What happens after is of no consequence to us millitarily.