America won the war with North Vietnam which ended in 1973. North Vietnam then won a war with South Vietnam, 1974-75, in which we treacherously chose to stop supporting our South Vietnamese ally. The decisive factor here was not any blow struck against America by North Vietnam, but rather Nixon's self-sabotage over Watergate, and the Democratic Congress' hating the Republican Presidency so deeply that they were mad enough to consider the fall of South Vietnam a "victory" for the US Democratic Party.
Why is it "trolling" to point out that North Vietnam did not conquer South Vietnam by defeating America in 1973, but rather by defeating South Vietnam in 1974-75? Is pointing out actual history now to be seen as "trolling," if it gets in the way of someone's fond historical myth?
More of a "draw," but since the North Vietnamese object was the conquest of South Vietnam, and ours merely the survival of South Vietnam, yes. The war that North Vietnam won was a war against South Vietnam alone, and she wouldn't have won that if Nixon's political folly and the Congressional Democrats' downright treason hadn't first neutralized US airpower as a factor.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 02:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 06:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 09:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 09:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 09:47 am (UTC)