Abortion Ship Arriving In Morocco (Muslim Territory)

[جوري]

--- Although South Vietnam fell, this turned out to be the high-water mark of Communist expansion. The reasons for this didn't just lie on the battlefield but the war certainly played a big part. So yes, it is certainly possible to achieve your objectives without necessarily winning the war.

The reverse also happens. You can win the war without achieving your objectives. For instance, the UK entered WW2 in defense of Poland. Not only was Poland swallowed up in the first fortnight, before the UK fired a shot in anger, but after the war it remained captive in Soviet hands. Yet the UK finished on the winning side.

---- Let's recap for you so you don't end up playing the victim card- Thread is about abortion ships arriving in the middle east, your predecessor buffoon seems to think it is a good idea for Muslims to abort and proclaims it isn't haram, and decides that overpopulation is the problem citing how technologically advanced the U.S and Israel is.
You've actually proved my point (thank you very much) with your
''possible to achieve your objectives without necessarily winning the war.''
In fact cements the idea that it isn't about technology and weaponry rather military prowess which the Vietnamese excelled at with their guerilla warfare.

Lastly, even though this topic is neither about Vietnam, or Poland (if you'd bother follow from the original premise) but what objective has the U.S achieved in Vietnam?

The Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) (Vietnamese: Đảng Cộng sản Việt Nam), formally established in 1930, is the governing party of the nation of Vietnam. It is today the only legal political party in that country. Describing itself as Marxist-Leninist, the CPV is the directing component of a broader group of organizations known as the Vietnamese Fatherland Front. In Vietnam, it is commonly referred to as "Đảng" (the Party) or "Đảng ta" (our Party).

you're too funny.. Again don't be bringing 'studies' from 1930 posing them as factual and injecting your own idea of what it means to win a war. ---
best,

 

[سيف الله]

Salaam

Overpopulation hmmm? Ive noticed its a obsession with certain type of western elites over the years. Maybe its a subconscious fear of being 'swamped' by outsiders. In certain western countries (eg. Denmark) they have trouble maintaining their own population levels.

America never faced "defeat", failure to win is not defeat. America lost 50,000+ soliders in the war, Vietnamese lost several millions, not exactly sure about the numbers. In the end Americans grew tired of the war and America never really stood to beenfit much for this. They were there just to prevent the communists from establishing a stronghold in Asia which would have caused a domino effect and spread onto other countries.

I really don't see how this relates to the Muslim world.

If you really believe that then you don't understand what the the Vietnam war was about.

 

[Aprender]

Completely different dynamic, I don't want to waste my time replying because I'll just get rebuttled with some other pointless analogy that doesn't relate to the discussion at all.

No it's not. Obviously you've never taken a military tactics or U.S. foreign policy class. The Vietnam War was fought in the exact same way as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were fought. They didn't follow traditional war method with traditional armed forces pitted against traditional armed forces but rather a counter insurgency to defeat a political ideology that America thought would be damaging to its success and long-term goals across the globe. It's the same thing that's being applied here to the Middle East except this time it's not Communism. The U.S. wouldn't like for the Khalifah to return but is more interested in the democratization of the world and maintaining its place as a world power and the continuation of capitalist economics. It's a valid comparison.

America never faced "defeat", failure to win is not defeat. America lost 50,000+ soliders in the war, Vietnamese lost several millions, not exactly sure about the numbers. In the end Americans grew tired of the war and America never really stood to beenfit much for this. They were there just to prevent the communists from establishing a stronghold in Asia which would have caused a domino effect and spread onto other countries.

It's like you quoted that out of a history text-book without any real analysis of the situation. This is what the late Walter Cronkite, had to say and he was the most trusted news man in America back then when real journalism was allowed:

The late Ed Bradley was also a very very good journalist who did some reporting on the Vietnam War and this is what he had to say:

America was defeated and it was time to leave Vietnam. Failure is a synonym of defeat. The same thing is happening now in Afghanistan.

 

[Muhammad]

:salamext:

A number of posts or comments that contained personal insults or were otherwise off-topic have been removed. Please remember to discuss the issue in a decent manner otherwise the thread will end up closed.

 

[karimium]

Too many of my posts are getting deleted. I have no t insulted anyone, if mods feel like I insulted someone, then please pm me with the sentences you think were insulting, or just delete the insults.

My entire posts are being deleted, including the post there which you just quoted.

You think America lost the war, I think nobody won during the vietnam war, the amaericans failed to win - that does not mean they lost. If you look at who was economically worse off, it';s the vietnamese. Vietnam cost the USA very little in power and influence around the world. Sure they lost 50,000 men, but that's not a huge loss compared to the vietnamese.

In any case whether the US won or lost, and vice versa for vietnam. It's utterly pointless.

Let me paint a hypothetical picyure to you. If the USA attacks Egpyt, and occupies it for 15 years, and completely destroys the infrastructure. Then there is a rebellion which forces the USA out of Egypt. Would you say Egpyt won the war? Clearly from what you said that would be a resounding yes.

But what if Egpyt was far worse off economically, the country is disunited and there are provicnces seeking idependance. Infrastature, schools, hospitals and destryed. Internal aid does not come in - so the countrey cannot develop itsellf. Illiteracy is higher than it was before the way. Now, would you say Egpyt has won the war?

this is ultimately what it comes down to. Not all wars have winners and losers, there are sometimes losers on both sides, and there are some cases where neither side wins.

IMO Vietnam war = vietnam lost as it obliterated their infrastructure and economy, and Americans lost a lot of soldiers and failed to win. But in the grand scheme of things they never lost the war, the war was against communism and they eventually ended up winning.

No it's not. Obviously you've never taken a military tactics or U.S. foreign policy class. The Vietnam War was fought in the exact same way as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were fought. They didn't follow traditional war method with traditional armed forces pitted against traditional armed forces but rather a counter insurgency to defeat a political ideology that America thought would be damaging to its success and long-term goals across the globe. It's the same thing that's being applied here to the Middle East except this time it's not Communism. The U.S. wouldn't like for the Khalifah to return but is more interested in the democratization of the world and maintaining its place as a world power and the continuation of capitalist economics. It's a valid comparison.




It's like you quoted that out of a history text-book without any real analysis of the situation. This is what the late Walter Cronkite, had to say and he was the most trusted news man in America back then when real journalism was allowed:



The late Ed Bradley was also a very very good journalist who did some reporting on the Vietnam War and this is what he had to say:


America was defeated and it was time to leave Vietnam. Failure is a synonym of defeat. The same thing is happening now in Afghanistan.