THE INTELLIGENCE FAILURE THAT LOST VIET NAM 

The longer it lasted the more money the defense industry could suck out of the pockets of the American public. They also had to establish their opium fields for the smack epidemic that followed in the U.S. after the war, just like after the war in Afghanistan.

True!!

It was a very different time period. China fell to communism, South Korea was invaded by the north and now the Republic of Vietnam was threatened by the politburo in Hanoi. The threat of communist expansion was very real and there was a perceived need to stand up to military aggression even if our "allies" were...not quite up to the task.

@@jdfields711 In the asshole of the Yanks,you are filthy maggots. None care of you ,dude!

I think the question is, "end badly" *_for whom?_* Cui bono? Who benefits? One (most) man's "waste of resources and human lives" is another man's containing China (Pentagon Papers), securing golden triangle/French connection, and entrenching transnational corporate/finance capital's "full spectrum domination" over the global working class to secure perpetual profit/class domination in the face of systemically inherent diminishing returns, strip-mining the planet and each other and ensuring the thanatos embrace towards the "common ruin of the contending classes". Indeed, the "cold" war wasn't very cold when, say, engulfed in napalm... Reminded of Michael Parenti, an excerpt from his piece Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty, which highlights the lacuna of class consciousness cultivated under the technologically mediated auspices of global US empire: _"In their perpetual confusion, some liberal critics conclude that foreign aid and IMF and World Bank structural adjustments “do not work”; the end result is less self-sufficiency and more poverty for the recipient nations, they point out. Why then do the rich member states continue to fund the IMF and World Bank? Are their leaders just less intelligent than the critics who keep pointing out to them that their policies are having the opposite effect?_ _No, it is the critics who are stupid not the western leaders and investors who own so much of the world and enjoy such immense wealth and success. They pursue their aid and foreign loan programs because such programs do work. The question is, work for whom? Cui bono?_ _The purpose behind their investments, loans, and aid programs is not to uplift the masses in other countries. That is certainly not the business they are in. The purpose is to serve the interests of global capital accumulation, to take over the lands and local economies of Third World peoples, monopolize their markets, depress their wages, indenture their labor with enormous debts, privatize their public service sector, and prevent these nations from emerging as trade competitors by not allowing them a normal development._ _In these respects, investments, foreign loans, and structural adjustments work very well indeed._ _The real mystery is: why do some people find such an analysis to be so improbable, a “conspiratorial” imagining? Why are they skeptical that U.S. rulers knowingly and deliberately pursue such ruthless policies (suppress wages, rollback environmental protections, eliminate the public sector, cut human services) in the Third World? These rulers are pursuing much the same policies right here in our own country!_ _Isn’t it time that liberal critics stop thinking that the people who own so much of the world---and want to own it all---are “incompetent” or “misguided” or “failing to see the unintended consequences of their policies”? You are not being very smart when you think your enemies are not as smart as you. They know where their interests lie, and so should we."_

@@EsterStPaul Same failed policy.

Iraq too.

yes - so much of what they discussed made me think of Afghanistan

the most brave were pilots of helicopter in 30/4/1975

The reason why we lost is because they had the moral high ground. Vietnam has always been one country and the Vietnames people wanted white people to stop running it. The United States did nothing for democracy in VietNam all those years the French ran it. You think the Vietnamese voted for the French?

Colonel Shockley died on 6 March 2020 and is buried at Beaufort National Cemetery in South Carolina.

samuel lmao what kinda name is that for a bhaskar lmaoo

there are no dead 50K+ US in Afghan. Not even close. And Hillary lost to a game show host

@@uncleho1945 Where did you get 3 million from? It was much lower than that. My sources say about 800,000 Vietnamese deaths from 1961 - 1975. Give or take of course.

In Vietnam, people live in villages, so they know each other's generations. So they can be estimated

In Vietnam , the Americans were forced to leave , and now they are coming back . In Afghanistan the Americans were forced to go in , they probably will never want to go back to Afghan , it has absolutely nothing .

The US is a war mongering nation. The US breads its people for war. Take a look at Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction. Afghanistan, because you thought they took down the world trade centre.

What the DoD learned was CONTROL THE MEDIA.

Even worse in Afghanistan…. see America’s departure.

killing inocents

The CIA was an apprentice to communist intelligence

Iraq too.

The peak of caring was early to mid-70s for the USA. The USA is too crooked to waste time on old crooked schemes.

US KNOW NOTHING

both

@@thuankhong you forgot Iraq.

They arrogantly think they have enough weapons to conquer and enough money to bribe,while simply recognizing Vietnam's independence was enough to turn the Ho Chi Minh government into a democratic and friendly one. USA has such wise politicians. That person was Senator W. Fulbright. During a hearing on the Vietnam War at the beginning, he said, "I also think the great nations , especially this one, are strong enough to make concessions without losing status and prestige of a great nation. On the contrary I think this will be one of the great victories,my greatest if I am wise and noble enough to settle this confrontation" The concession he spoke of was to let the Vietnamese people choose their own government, even though the victor was Ho Chi Minh.

Oh dear..here we go. The Viet Cong were Communists...who murdered their way to victory. They would not have won the war without the huge support from Communist China and the Soviet Union. Today....they are our allies against another Communist Menace the CCP. Times change....allies change....history does not.

@@bocagoodtimes1460 And part of that history is I didn't waste my life for all that BS that does change.

you are right

Exactly! Reminded of Michael Parenti, an excerpt from his piece Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty, which highlights the lacuna of class consciousness cultivated under the technologically mediated auspices of global US empire: _"In their perpetual confusion, some liberal critics conclude that foreign aid and IMF and World Bank structural adjustments “do not work”; the end result is less self-sufficiency and more poverty for the recipient nations, they point out. Why then do the rich member states continue to fund the IMF and World Bank? Are their leaders just less intelligent than the critics who keep pointing out to them that their policies are having the opposite effect?_ _No, it is the critics who are stupid not the western leaders and investors who own so much of the world and enjoy such immense wealth and success. They pursue their aid and foreign loan programs because such programs do work. The question is, work for whom? Cui bono?_ _The purpose behind their investments, loans, and aid programs is not to uplift the masses in other countries. That is certainly not the business they are in. The purpose is to serve the interests of global capital accumulation, to take over the lands and local economies of Third World peoples, monopolize their markets, depress their wages, indenture their labor with enormous debts, privatize their public service sector, and prevent these nations from emerging as trade competitors by not allowing them a normal development._ _In these respects, investments, foreign loans, and structural adjustments work very well indeed._ _The real mystery is: why do some people find such an analysis to be so improbable, a “conspiratorial” imagining? Why are they skeptical that U.S. rulers knowingly and deliberately pursue such ruthless policies (suppress wages, rollback environmental protections, eliminate the public sector, cut human services) in the Third World? These rulers are pursuing much the same policies right here in our own country!_ _Isn’t it time that liberal critics stop thinking that the people who own so much of the world---and want to own it all---are “incompetent” or “misguided” or “failing to see the unintended consequences of their policies”? You are not being very smart when you think your enemies are not as smart as you. They know where their interests lie, and so should we."_

He is at the top of this list, for allowing communist intelligence to infiltrate all South Vietnamese government organizations, from the local government to the Saigon presidential palace. He is a shameless liar

He can't gave himself to Justice

No American ever wanted to die for you cowards and fools

@@havu-oj4qh cowards ? Like the coward Vietcong who go into villages and cut the limbs off children because their parents wouldn't fight with them .EAD Northy

The braver ,the smarter must win

IT WAS THEIR COUNTRY.

This is partly true. Martin was attempting to maintain an image of a strong Saigon, of course why wouldn't he. Showing your weakness to the enemy never ends well. But hiding factual intelligence from the those that needed to know didn't help either. Put simply SVN needed probably another five years minimum to get its act together. A period of time Hanoi was never going to allow them to have.

You are right.American presidents thought they could force the Vietnamese to give up their will to independence for their country. That is naive arrogance. You will have to pay a heavy price if you oppose the Vietnamese people's aspirations for independence and unification. That is the result of a study by the US Department of Defense.(The vietnam war) which China cannot do even though it had dominated Vietnam for thousand of years and still has to recognize Vietnam's independence

The Vietnamese did not vote for the French, the Americans, nor did they vote for the American henchmen in Saigon. So the US missed an opportunity for which the US had to pay with the lives of 58,000 young soldiers. , $1.4 trillion and killed 3 million Vietnamese and still failed.

Such a simplistic one sided view. If unification were that important, why were re-education camps necessary?

@@pkn920 Viet Nam has always been one country for a thousand years or more. The Viet Cong were Vietnamese from the south who wanted the French and Americans gone. When a vote was taken the majority of the people from the south wanted unification. America ignored the results. Do you know that Viet Nam is one of the worlds top 10 economies? High education rate. Low poverty levels. 300,000 Americans vacation there every year. You think they regret France and America leaving?

@@Itsatz010 best economies in the world, seriously? What vote are you talking about? Did they vote after 1975 when they put all the South Vietnamese in re education camps? Viet Cong and Southerners who supported the North are represented in the government in Hanoi-not!

30,000 ton bomb in 12 days wasn't enough for bloodlust of you beasts?

Nixon promised to get it over with, but he couldn't do this because the US Congress blocked this possibility of intervention

The US Congress did not allow the US president to do what he promised.

The Paris Agreement just so that America's departure was not humiliating

@@thuankhong Nixon knew that Congress would not follow up, so he owns this.

Don't show off smarter than the insiders. The CIA killed the South Vietnamese president when he refused to let the US send more troops into South Vietnam.

This guy wasn't fool when VC's spies were everywhere in South Vietnam? The US molded the Republic of Vietnam, when you lost, you only blame it?

But the communists didn't leave the Americans there!

escap from vietnam in humiliating way say it all