Won against France

>won against France
>won against the USA
>won against China
>liberated Cambodia from the Red Khmers

Why were they so successful?

Other urls found in this thread:

scribd.com/document/345270752/A-Tale-of-Five-Generals-Vietnam-s-Invasion-of-Cambodia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Vietnam
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Because they knew their political objectives and used military force to obtain them.

They followed Clauswitz's maxim "War is the continuation of politics" to the letter.

You don't need to outgun the enemy to win a war, you just need to get what you want and ensure the enemy doesn't get what they want.

In the case of France ad the USA, the goal was respectively maintain newfound independence and unite South Vietnam respectively. In the case of China, it was to bungle its punitive war. In the case of Cambodia, it was to install a government that would not engage in border raids.

When your goals are straightforward and meaningful to you and you are willing to fight for them, you have one element of a future victory.

because they're on their fucking land
try winning the above three on somewhere other than dense ass jungle

>be a world power
>get cucked from a jungle
how can someone recover from this

do whatever the usa did and become the global hegemon?

It won't stay there for long at this rate.

Fun read about Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia by Merle Pribbenow

scribd.com/document/345270752/A-Tale-of-Five-Generals-Vietnam-s-Invasion-of-Cambodia

Control their economy

a 50 kilometer wide jungle

because they were fully committed to victory at any cost, and the cost was indeed extremely high

Literally in what way is the US tending towards becoming less of a global hegemon?

Enormous home field advantage.

They had enough political support among their population to make the cost of occupation to high. It's simple if the United States didn't care it could have turned North Vietnam into a nuclear wasteland. But this would be extremely costly and might even lead to all out nuclear war.

you forgot the Japanese

>won nothing
>won nothing
>won nothing
>liberated no one

Why are they such losers?

The Vietnam War was a loss for everyone involved. What transpired was probably the absolute worst case scenario for both sides.

Vietnam would have been better off today had they surrendered, and the US would have been better off had they pulled out much earlier or never gotten involved in the first place. It's like both countries were fighting for the wrong damn thing.

>liberated Cambodia from the Red Khmers
And after doing so, instead of winning easy PR points for removing a brutal dictatorship, they made perfectly clear that they didn't give a shit about the human rights situation in Cambodia, and they were doing it purely for self-serving purposes. I get a kick out of that.
>England: "We fight for what the Huns did to plucky, little Belgium! We swear it has nothing to do with our own imperial ambitions."
>Germany: "We fight for the mistreatment of our countrymen in Poland! We swear the territorial expansion is merely a byproduct."
>USA: "We fight to stop the spread of communism and human misery! We swear we'll install a democratic state with fair elections. Maybe. Eventually."
>Vietnam: "They fucked with our shit, so we killed enough of them that they don't anymore."

Why worse? Nothing new for Vietnam. Before they had a 200 years civil war, North (Trinh) versus South (Nguyen). There were Dutch, French mercenaries fought in this war. Vietnamese were not afraid for some little fun war. There is a Vietnamese saying: 50 years of war, 50 years of peace.

That's the great thing about the Vietnam War.

>both sides honestly believed they were doing the right thing
>nobody won
>everybody lost

Underrated post.

For everyone of those wins, they lost 7 times first.

>won against France
>won against the USA
Without the endless help from Soviets and China, they really couldn't win shit.

>>won against China
Nope, the war in 1979 is a draw, and Vietnam actually lost most battles in the continue small conflicts during 1980~1989.

>>liberated Cambodia from the Red Khmers
Except it's still ruled by commies until 1989

You forgot to add the Mongols

>if USA had Death Star, they could have won!!111!!!

>Except it's still ruled by commies until 1989
In theory it remains full of commies to the present day, it's just that they're about as communist as China.
The Khmer Rouge rebranded themselves as "Democratic Socialists" after being ousted in 1981 with the Party of Democratic Kampuchea and the Cambodian National Unity Party, while the Cambodian People's Party (formerly Kampuchean People's Revolutionary Party) officially renounced Marxism-Leninism after the Soviet Union dissolved but otherwise remained much the same. Hun Sen has essentially been PM since 1985 (when it was style a Stalinist one-party state), although he shared the role with Prince Ranaridh for a few years.

Frankly speaking, US really didn't lose in battlefield, they lost in politics and morale.

t,not American

The whole world hates the US, the economy is struggling and the nation seems very internally divided

>Without the endless help from Soviets and China, they really couldn't win shit.
South Vietnam couldn't win shit even with help.

>Nope, the war in 1979 is a draw, and Vietnam actually lost most battles in the continue small conflicts during 1980~1989

They prevented China from accomplishing its strategic objectives of stopping the Cambodian invasion (Pol Pot had already fled by then), and held them back despite 4/5ths of the military being in Cambodia and unavailable to fight the Chinese.

>Except it's still ruled by commies until 1989

By the logic of the sino soviet split they removed a pro PRC dictatorship and replaced it with a pro SRV dictatorship. You could hardly expect Vietnam to install a pro-western capitalism.

>Nobody lost
Alright USA

When was it an achievement to win against France?

They're impressive victories because we judge military prowess by things like technical advantage or numerically superior, when the metric that really matters is how much each belligerent is willing to expend to achieve victory. That's not something exclusive to the Vietnamese, it's true of most successful revolutionary wars as well.

>They prevented China from accomplishing its strategic objectives of stopping the Cambodian invasion (Pol Pot had already fled by then), and held them back despite 4/5ths of the military being in Cambodia and unavailable to fight the Chinese.
Yeah, but the "draw" is still "draw", and they still lost most battles of latter serious conflicts during 1980~1989. Vietnam didn't win, just like US didn't win even if they didn't really lost in battlefields.


>By the logic of the sino soviet split they removed a pro PRC dictatorship and replaced it with a pro SRV dictatorship. You could hardly expect Vietnam to install a pro-western capitalism.
Yeah, but Khmesr were still Red even after Vietnam removed Pol Pot.

And Americans finally acquired Red China as ally to contain Soviets and won the whole cold war in the end, after all these conflicts.

Unbreakable anti imperialist spirit

>the economy is struggling
The US economy is in the best shape in decades you idiot

But not everyone in the society benefits from that so that's a problem

>implying failed revolutionary wars were different in that sense

>Won against France
nigger what

Only need one joke president to stir up some shit in the government.

North Vietnam won. I'm sick of this retarded historical revisionism from Americans to justify their own incompetence.

What are you even doing on a history board

>Vietnam would have been better off today had they surrendered,

You have absolutely no way of knowing this.

Vietnam right now is a thriving and proud nation.

ITT: butthurt Americans who just can't accept that they lost

So I heard somewhere, maybe even on Veeky Forums, that the government of South Vietnam were the remnants of the old colonial elite and that they were highly unpopular among South Vietnamese and the only reason they won in the elections was because of the US financing and even rigging them.

How true is this? Are there any books or documentaries I can read/watch about it?

You do realize this level of growth since the recession is the climax of an inflation bubble ready to burst?

>You do realize this level of growth since the recession is the climax of an inflation bubble ready to burst?
What the fuck are you talking about? How is there an "inflation bubble?" The US used to have much worse inflation for much longer periods of time. I don't think you know what a bubble is. If anything, student loans is the bubble.

The Vietnam war is unironically why I'm a nationalist

They were a massively outgunned force but they were fighting for themselves while their enemies were fighting for their shitty ideology and the prospect of world domination, so they fucking won

France and USA raped their ass to death, but thanks to the soviet infiltration of wester countries, the few dead soldiers we had were enough to make the population hate the war.

Thats called loosing. NV commanders knew that they could not defeat South with conventional methods.

>what is Dien Bien Phu

>won against China
Source? Historical consensus states that it was a draw.

>despite 4/5ths of the military being in Cambodia
Wrong. By February 1979 most of the military had returned considering the Khmer lost in January.

>& Humanities

What do you mean Dien Bien Puh? I don't even know where Dien Bien Puh ist!

>Yeah, but the "draw" is still "draw"

Are you daft? If two sides fight and one side withdraws, leaving one to hold the field of battle, who has the victory?

>And Americans finally acquired Red China as ally to contain Soviets and won the whole cold war in the end, after all these conflicts.

What does that have to do with Vietnam winning the Cambodian War?

>The US economy is in the best shape in decades you idiot
>Bond Rates still in the shutter
>Fed still in terror of raising rates in a meaningful way.
>Massive disconnect in economic performance between regions
>GDP growth at fucking 2% is considering the new normal and "good"
>High paying jobs becoming ever more elusive to come by and requiring ever higher levels of experience to even enter .

And most crucially
>U.S economy still massively dependent on now FOUR fucking banks to maintain stability, a situation even WORSE that that of 2008.

Oh yeah the economy is great. Please tell more about what the "official" government numbers are telling us about how great a job our government is doing at keeping the economy afloat and remember to vote for you local congressman :^)

>The whole world hates the US
This just shows how comfortable the west is because of US hegemony. Also who gives a shit what non-Americans think?

Home field advantage for one.

They were hardcore niggas throughout all of their history.

China tried to conquer them for centuries but they failed, due to constant revolts.

Also OP you forgot the Mongols:

>During the Trần dynasty, the armies of the Mongol Empire under Möngke Khan and Kublai Khan invaded Annam in 1258, 1285, and 1287 88. Annam repelled all attacks of the Yuan Mongols during the reign of Kublai Khan. Three Mongol armies said to have numbered from 300,000 to 500,000 men were defeated. The key to Annam's successes was to avoid the Mongols' strength in open field battles and city sieges—the Trần court abandoned the capital and the cities. The Mongols were then countered decisively at their weak points, which were battles in swampy areas such as Chương Dương, Hàm Tử, Vạn Kiếp and on rivers such as Vân Đồn and Bạch Đằng. The Mongols also suffered from tropical diseases and loss of supplies to Trần army's raids. The Yuan-Trần war reached its climax when the retreating Yuan fleet was decimated at the Battle of Bạch Đằng (1288).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Vietnam

>reading comprehension