Jump to content

USA Vs PRC Part Deux: The Aftermath


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

quote:

I'm not sure about this one either. Rifles weren't invented until the Civil War. The difference here is that the barrels were "rifled" with a spiral groove that caused the

shot to rotate as it flew, causing the shot to travel straighter. The machinery wasn't around in the 1770's to manufacture this.

Actually Steve there is a somewhat amusing story about this.

The british captured 2 farmers, part of the militia, and took them and their weapons back to Britain. They wanted to know how they could pick off British Troops at such long ranges. They found out, when the weapons were demonstrated for the king. They had rifled barrels. After finding this out, the British tried to create rifled barrels as well, as you know from history, it was too little too late.

As far as the French, you may be right, I have not studied the French in the revolution as much as I have studied the Americans in the actual war itself. They may have been a major factor at the time, but I still think we would have won without them. But then again, I am a hardcore patriot, so we might have lost, who knows!! lol

And something that I missed in the above post, having Americans armed, keeps the government from getting too confident in tearing the constitution apart, it has taken over 50 years for the liberals in this country to get us to where we are, and it will take us at least that long to tear it apart and bring the Fed's back under control, but without our privately owned weapons, who knows where we might be now. It scares me to even think about it. But the liberals are still dreaming about the day when they can take our guns from us, just as they have done in Australia, and Canada.

quote:

Despite the injustice, the military supported the government. When it was becoming clear to the government that they were going to lose the war but continued

drafting American citizens anyway, the military didn't stop it. As a result, hundreds of thousands of Americans and Vietnamese were killed in a war that should never have occurred in the first place.

There are only so many things that a Constitution can protect you from. Don't

count on the military being on your side.

Now then, let's take a look at that, Vietnam was NEVER an actual declared war, it was a police action, though it is called the Vietnam war. This was the mistake, we should have declared it a war and let the military handle it, we then would have won.

Politicians handled that war and it was a HUGE mistake. But again, it was on foreign soil, not here, therefore the politicians could pretty much do what they wanted. The military knows the rules, and foriegn wars are part of their mission.

Fact is Truman should have allowed McArthur to go into China, but being the politician he was, he just couldn't do it. McArthur had the future of US Security in mind when he wanted to do that, just as Patton did when he wanted to march into the USSR after WWII, which he should have been allowed to do as well. The military knew who they were going to have to fight, and wanted to do it before the enemy got too strong to beat.

Vietnam was actually a war between the superpowers, the USSR and the US, whether you know it or not, and many of the smaller police actions and skirmishes were the same thing. a Pseudowar between the superpowers, we couldn't take each other on directly, but with our surrogates we could take each other on indirectly.

Thank God for Reagan!! He put an end to that follishness!!!

Reagan is one of my personal hero's, and is the main reason that I joined the military, that I am still interested in politics, and am a conservative. He has had more to do with the direction my life has gone then any other person besides my parents. He made me FEEL GOOD about being an American, he put patriotism in vogue again, he made us feel that we could actually beat the USSR, and guess what? he did!!! He beat the USSR!!! Just as our man Bush is going to beat China, and he's not gonna fire a shot!!!

[ 05-01-2001: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

quote:

Now then, let's take a look at that, Vietnam was NEVER an actual declared war, it was a police action, though it is called the Vietnam war. This was the mistake, we should have declared it a war and let the military handle it, we then would have won.

America still wouldn't have won, because the US military didn't have much experience in guerrilla warfare. The VietCong knew the jungle like the back of their hands, they were battle-hardened after fighting for independence, their guerrilla tactics were refined to a sharp point, and America's air superiority had no significant effect since they could not even see where the VietCong was hiding.

quote:

Fact is Truman should have allowed McArthur to go into China, but being the politician he was, he just couldn't do it. McArthur had the future of US Security in mind when he wanted to do that, just as Patton did when he wanted to march into the USSR after WWII, which he should have been allowed to do as well. The military knew who they were going to have to fight, and wanted to do it before the enemy got too strong to beat.

MacArthur was dismissed after the results of his approach toward Chinese borders. The Chinese sent a warning not to go further, it was ignored, and the Chinese eventually sent over half a million troops against MacArthur, pushing him past the 38th Parallel and south of Seoul.

If he did succeed in invading China, the war would have been a big disaster for America because the Russians would have intervened in the conflict, and together with China, and with the future of Soviet security in mind, would have pushed America off the Korean Peninsula entirely.

quote:

Vietnam was actually a war between the superpowers, the USSR and the US, whether you know it or not, and many of the smaller police actions and skirmishes were the same thing. a Pseudowar between the superpowers, we couldn't take each other on directly, but with our surrogates we could take each other on indirectly.

I knew that. It was called a 'Balance of Terror'. But Vietnam was different from other conflicts like Korea because it was caused by a superpower instead of one of the surrogates, neither of which wanted to fight in the first place. All they wanted was unity as a people. When the USA made that impossible, the VietCong, who had thrown the French out in 1954, were determined to do the same to the Americans.

quote:

Thank God for Reagan!! He put an end to that follishness!!!

I think Gorbachev had a lot to do with it as well. After all, he was the one who received the Nobel Peace Prize for helping to end the Cold War.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I think Gorbachev had a lot to do with it as well. After all, he was the one who received the Nobel Peace Prize for helping to end the Cold War.

Gorbachev had absolutely nothing to do with it, except for the fact that he happened to be in power when Reagan did what he did. He didn't have a choice, either throw in the towel, or watch the USSR totally implode.

After seeing your comments for the last few weeks, I have to give up on you. Common sense and personal responsibility seem to mean nothing to you. You would rather have the government protect you in everything you do. You are indeed a true blue Socialist.

Until you have a personal experience of how this system does not work, it will continue to be a religion for you. Just as I do not argue with a religious fanatic, I feel sorry for them, but will not argue with them. So I will feel sorry for you, and hope to god that most people will be too smart and see through what you say.

But in all honesty, I have to feel sorry for you, as I would a small child, who will not learn the lessons the adults try to teach them, but must learn those lessons for themselves. I am just sorry that lesson will probably come with the destruction of your country from within.

Good luck Menchise, but like I said above, you can lead the horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


If anything, Socialists are more active in working to end injustice than any other group. Conservatives prefer to give money to the poor (nothing wrong with that), Socialists prefer to punish the businesses that took away the money from the poor in the first place (read about the theories of Surplus Value and the Alienation of Labour).

In other words, socialists look to blame and punish while conservatives look to fix by donating time and money. Most people in America own part of an evil corporation, by the way.

quote:


In the strictest sense, your argument is correct. If the American government decided to turn fascist, it is quite possible that the military will withdraw its support, but remember that the US military had no objections to providing aid to oppressive governments outside of the US in the past, including Chile under Pinochet's rule, and El Salvador during its guerrilla war in the 1980s.

One: those countries are NOT the US. Why would military personnel rebel in THAT circumstance?

Two: Those actions took place during the Cold War, in which the world was a drastically different place than it is today. Those actions were taken at a time in which our nation's interests were being served. Same thing with Vietnam - do you think unification was the doing of the Vietnamese? NO WAY! It was the doing of the USSR who wanted ANOTHER place to park their missiles, more territory to control.

If the US didn't fight the USSR on every battlefield it could find, NO ONE would. We'd STILL have missiles pointed at us today.

Besides, Vietnam wasn't a total defeat for the US. It did help keep the USSR at bay - you know, the country that has NUCLEAR MISSILES pointed at every FREE country in the WORLD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...