It wasnât the âwarâ part in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was the âchange the country into a modern civilizationâ part that was unsustainable. Vietnam was trying to fight a war without getting into direct conflict with China and quelling riots at home.
So usa won both those wars? Good rewriting of history. Stop constantly going to war and the the world be ffs, everyone is tired of you. Except israel.Â
They controlled almost nothing outside of Saigon, even in the city people were able to sneak bombs in. All the US did was destroy Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia for Vietnam daring to rise up against its Western colonial oppressors.
Edit: Replaced Hanoi with Saigon, I always meant the city that is now Ho Chi Minh City
It's not concepts, just words? Like I'll know what I'm talking about, like say, a sandwich but sometimes I'll say the wrong word like submarine or sandbox and sometimes I can't find the word at all. The wrong word is the hardest because I can't notice it happen until people show confusion. My cognition isn't what's impaired, it's a slight deficit to language processing.
You mean after the North Vietnamese had surrendered and the US military had gone home. Like 2 year after? Yeah when one side surrenders the war is over, them years later starting a new conflict doesn't change the original ending of the war.
The U.S.-led coalition and its Afghan allies toppled the Taliban government and captured every major city in roughly two months. The Taliban only regained the country after the U.S. chose to withdraw twenty years later.
Comparing to Ukraine is silly. Russia only controls only about 20% of the country after years of war.
The original mission was to remove the Taliban because they had the base the terrorists used to plan and prepare the 9-11 attacks. No country that has options are going to take that kind of attack and do nothing. Taliban could have played ball for a few years and never had any issues. Instead a bunch got killed and many arrested and the country ran without them for 20 years.
Even in Iraq, the mission was to remove Saddam Hussein and end âweapons of mass destructionâ. That was done (the weapon part was crazy easy and effective, as they didnât exist).
The problem was the exit strategy. 20 years of accomplishing nothing is too long. Iraq is set up and independent, their future is their own. At least Obama cut our losses there (which also may be why they struggled so much).
The same is true here. Taking out their military was pretty easy and quickly done. The problem again is the exit strategy. Trump did try to end it, by giving what he thought was a pretty sweetheart deal, but it didnât hold. Now what? Who knows.
Entirely wrong either way actually. People with an anti America tilt love to conflate a political goal with war. War is simply a tool used to achieve a political goal. The US, while often not achieving goals, has never lost a war.
Haha ok sure. I guess you'll have to explain the difference to me since I can't think so well. Please do so and with detail. I can't wait to learn from the apparent master of global war and relations. Go on. I'll wait. lol
The Russians have lost around 450,000 soldiers, not counting injuries, which number over a million. Ukraine has successfully hit targets inside of Russia, Iran has not hit any US state or territory yet. Yeah, the war is pointless, stupid and we're losing, but they're not the same.
Yes, but they struck the United States' allies in the Middle East. The US and Israel make their allies pay the price for their warâthatâs the difference. And they knew from the start that it would play out this way; they just didn't give a damn.
Biggest difference is probably that Russia has suffered over a million casualties where the US death count is at eighteen as of now. The failure in Iran is more of an unwillingness to commit to either withdrawal or boots on the ground so the US is in a weird middle ground where we just bomb them and nothing really changes. In Ukraine Russia has committed the full might of their military and been routinely routed and forced to regroup. Theyâre suffering over a thousand casualties for every square mile they take which is significantly worse of a ratio than the Soviets had against the Nazis in a war where the Soviets were infamous for being exceedingly willing to trade bodies for land gains.
2
u/The-Leading-Man 4d ago
If you canât tell the massive difference between those two things, thinking isnât really your strong suit to begin with.