Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
His original point was unmistable: Vietnam won, America lost.
|
His original three paragraphs were:
Quote:
AQ is no field army, and thus should not be measured by performance in field battles. It is a mix of guerilla and terror, political, social and religious involvement. They amkew the West investing horren dious sums of money worldwide to boost security anbd engage in miliutary actions. That means they are very well potent enough to make us sacrificing a solid ammount of our economic and financial ressources for the military, because of them.
Same could be said about the Taliban, who also seem to suffer defeats in open field battles - still are short of becoming the unconditional victor in the Afghanistan war.
In Vietnam the Vietcong also lost every ground battle and offensive it tried - and still won the war.
|
This is a direct comparison between the AQ and the Viet Cong, and therefore in my opinion a statement that the VC won the war with their tactics, similar to those of AQ (or the other way around, the AQ is winning with the same tactics as the VC).
Only in the second post, after the difference was made between the NVA and the VC, did it become "your enemy" instead of the VC. Again, as I see it, the question is not if America lost or not, because no one has said it didn't. It is if the guerilla tactics caused that loss or not.