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.
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.
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?
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 09:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-27 09:49 am (UTC)