I'm an oblivious person, I probably should know more about where this all is and the country flags, but if you don't know this stuff you learn nothing from this video. It just looks cool. Country names and flags key would be nice. Yes I suck I don't know
The red vlag with a yellow star is vietnam.
The yellowish flag does not represent a country. I presume it is a flag of a joint force.
The flag with 5 horizontal lines is Thailand.
The blue-red-blue flag with a castle in the middle is Cambodia.
We also have American flags.
The white one with a dot in the middle and 4 black details in the corner is south korea.
The blue/red one with a white dot in the middle is Laos.
Later on we have some (I think) Australian flags, but I did not get a good look.
And then there is the red/blue flag with a star in the middle which probably is a combination of Vietnam and some other country, or it was a flag tha doesnt exist anymore in the modern day.
The yellow flag represents the RVN (South Vietnam Republic).
The blue Cambodian flag is the Kingdom of Cambodia, which was then replaced by the Khmer Republic.
The red flag with the yellow temple later in the vid is Khmer Rouge (that genocidal one).
The half blue, half red Vietnamese flag is the National Liberation Front. This is the infamous Viet Cong guerrilla force.
It appears that way, and the Easter offensive likely at 52 second mark with the slight push by North Vietnam prior to complete withdrawal of US and SK forces
It's a portrait crop of[ this landscape video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_glcuOZ8Sg) which has the dates. 0:30 is in 1965, the Tet offensive would be around 0:38 and doesn't really show up much on this map.
This is more of a don’t fight the people on their territory. They know the land and how to use it. Goes with every war the US has recently fought and lost since the Vietnam war.
Tunnel networks play a large factor. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria... so many unknown tunnel networks with supplies, traps, shelter. And only the locals know them.
Vietnam wasn't supposed to be a war. Americans were supposed to be peace keepers teaching the Vietnamese how to defend themselves against communism.
Didn't work out that way. Many of the Vietnamese, Cambodian, fighters from the Phillipines armies did not want to fight. *(Don't even start. I said some, not all, & I happen to think that, historically, America has been pulled in to "humanitarian crisis" that we shouldn't have poked our troops or money into. Period.)*
Initial skirmishes with the NVA moved the American teachers into American fighters. America in the conflict as an aggressor would kick off by a mistake in the Gulf of Tonkin.
The prior 50 years had seen America in 3 previous wars. Americans were weary of war & while Americans had seen images from the Civil War, WWI, Korea, WWII...they really weren't prepared for the daily & live coverage of this war. They had no stomach for it.
Coverage had also changed. Prior wars were presented as *"Americans fighting the red scourge!"*, *"Rah, rah, yah...get 'em boys"* & Americans supported the troops. By the time Vietnam rolled around, the press portrayed this conflict differently & in so doing, American attitudes changed too.
Americans balked at sending forces to die in a land where (initially) it's own people wouldn't fight for. Lyndon Johnson certainly didn't inspire a reason, any reason to send troops & by the time Nixon was in the mix...even his advisors didn't trust him.
Most can tell you the American cost was over 58,000 troops. But in those almost 20 yrs, we had sent almost 3 million Americans into war. South Vietnam sent a total of 1.5 million. No other country came remotely close to those numbers.
Yet more than 2 million died in this "proxy war".
Every war US fought since then was a limited engagement.
You can clearly see in the video that there was no intention to attack NV territory - and this is the main factor. You can’t win a fight if you don’t engage in full.
>This is more of a don’t fight the people on their territory. They know the land and how to use it.
The homefield advantage the NVA/VC had has been vastly exaggerated. Much of the fighting was in the jungle and/or mountains where almost nobody lived, the NVA/VC had no more of an advantage fighting there than an American would have fighting in Yellowstone. And of course in the fighting taking place in the more populated areas the NVA/VC were more familiar with the terrain and of course language than the Americans, but that ignores the South Vietnamese who knew it just as well as them, and in many cases better than the majority of the NVA/VC who were born and raised in North Vietnam, hundreds of miles away from where they ended up fighting in South Vietnam where the majority of the South Vietnamese were fighting in the province they grew up in or a neighboring province.
but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line"! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha...
It’s a crazy forgotten part of history. Basically being so poor SK offered troops for the meat grinder in Vietnam in return for economic aid. And it wasn’t a handful of soldiers, they sent 350000 soldiers. Fascinating part of the Cold War world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea_in_the_Vietnam_War
The Americans never really had their heart in the conflict, most soldiers were jaded and wondering why they were even there in the first place. The South Koreans however were fervently opposed to communism because of what they’d just recently went through with their own civil war, so ideologically they were fanatical. This led to them committing numerous war crimes, stuff that makes My Lai look reasonable in comparison.
I want to emphasize just how bad the South Koreans treated the Vietnamese, and not just killings but the cruelty they displayed. I’m talking ripping off breasts of teenage women, babies on spikes, massacres ranging into the thousands. Don’t take my previous comment as downplaying My Lai, but as elevating the crimes against humanity perpetrated by the South Koreans.
In short there was a lot of sexual violence (as is the case with most occupying armies). To this day there's a large population of Korean-Vietnamese who are badly stigmatized within Vietnam and continue to seek compensation from the Korean government:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/may/28/children-of-vietnam-wars-survivors-unjustly-bear-the-burden-of-others-crimes
They also just killed quite a lot of people:
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-court-orders-first-compensation-vietnam-war-victim-2023-02-07/
It bugs me that in that first article, she translated "lai đại hàn" as "mixed blood", but it specifically means "Korean hybrid (like a mule)".
These days, Korean hybrids are viewed with admiration and perhaps jealousy here in Vietnam, but I will say that institutions here discriminate against women and children in cases where the father is unknown or the mother wasn't married. I think that's where the bias comes into play against that specific group.
Australia had over 60,000 troops over the span of the war so it's a little surprising that their flag doesn't show up but I guess they might not have been concentrated enough.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGDhzVi1bqU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGDhzVi1bqU)
Obligatory Aussie Vietnam war song if anyone hasn't heard it
There are two words in the Russian language: the first one used to call an ethnicity and the second one for nationality. In the Soviet time you can be ethnically Russian and a Soviet citizen. But people used Russian in the meaning of ethnicity really more often than they should do. In terms of Stalin's speech he used "Russian as ethnicity" for basically Soviet people. Idk the ideology behind that, but think about it as about major people in the Soviet Union. For example: 1/9 of Belarusian population was killed in the second world war. So yeah, it's more "Soviet victory" in terms of that era.
Soviet Union was essentially just another form of colonial Russian Empire, so calling it Russia is definitely not wrong.
Calling all the Soviets Russians would be absolutely wrong, tho, and if used in a wrong time in a wrong place that disapproval could arrive with physical punctuation. Yes we absolutely take it seriously enough.
It was victory for Stalin. Stalin united with Britain & the USA to take on Nazi Germany.
Absolutely considered a Russian victory. When the heads of state sat down to decide the spoils of war, there were 3 - Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt.
Vietnam was a proxy war. More the US against Russia than countries trying to unify Vietnam.
Edit...misspelling
They're notorious for being extremely brutal and savage towards POWs and civilians alike. My grandpa said we tried to capture American POWs (for peace negotiation leverage) but for Korean it's instant execution, no exception.
Not being sympathetic is one thing, S.Korean soldiers were literally like the Japanese at Nanjing. An estimation of 9000 civilians were killed, according to Busan Ilbo, there are at least 5000 and as many as 30,000 Vietnamese-Korean mixed children born during the war as results of rape.
They also refuse to acknowledge any atrocities committed. The closest thing we had was when Moon Jae-in expressed "regrets over an unfortunate past".
It was a do or die. They went for recognition and economic aid. They also had a score to settle with the communists after the Korean War. I'm sure the North hated them because they fought for a purpose. Americans did not.
Yea, and so did the North and the USA. My Lai massacre.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Cong_and_People%27s_Army_of_Vietnam_use_of_terror_in_the_Vietnam_War
One thing that I think we Americans get wrong about the Vietnam war is the classification of everyone as Viet Cong. Technically only the flags you see in the South west tip that are surrounded for most of the war are the VC. They were helped and supported by the north but in the beginning it was very much two separate fronts.
This was something I didn’t learn until embarrassingly late into my own research on The Vietnam War. (Having never been taught much about it at all in my education). For so many sources, the VC and North Vietnamese seemed interchangeable— their distinction wasn’t made clear to me for some time.
(Edit: I believe it was finally clarified for me while watching the Ken Burns Vietnam documentary)
Its so good. So so good. War documentaries have become my absolute favorite genre. The amount of hours Ive spent watching WW2 doc series in particular.
Im actually weirdly uninterested in WW1. Horses, gasmasks, and trenches just doesnt cut it for me. I dont really understand why, but WW2 seems to be where my historical interest begins. Anything after that Im good with. Probably has a lot to do with the lack of footage prior to WW2.
I could claim it's because WW2 has so many faciniting elements; an evermoving frontline in multiple counties, alliances changing throughout, obscene political extremism, human suffering beyond imagination, leaps in technological and mechanical innovation during the war. But.. the Vietnam War dowsnt have these elements (for the most part) and I still find that to be absolute top shelf doc theme as well. So I think its down to lack od footage, and the fact that I just cant relate to the WW1 era the way I can to WW2 and beyond. Maybe it will come with age. More age. Fuck Im already middle-aged, how the heck did that happen.
I think the fascinating parts of WW1 are all about the insane speed warfare evolved (specifically with regards to artillery - they were using 18lb guns in the 1880s). In the early battles of the war they were lining up and marching into machine gun fire.
The other aspect is the human experience component. Absolutely atrocious conditions in the trenches. Completely unlike anything humans have experienced before or since.
This is exactly why I’m fascinated by it. They were figuring out how to fight in real time and the results of that were astonishing. Entire air forces were created during the war. There were soldiers who saw tanks before knowing they existed. There were days where tens of thousands of bombs exploded each and every hour.
Don’t forget chemical warfare. Imagine breathing in mustard gas not knowing what’s going on and then your lungs fill up with fluid and your skin starts to blister and bubble 🫧
It’s just media shaping your perception of events. Read about WW1 and the Korean War to put WW2 in perspective, and you’ll gain more appreciation for the history of all 3
It is hard to find for free or cheap unfortunately. I bought it on Amazon for 10€ (German audio only in Germany) and watched some episodes on YouTube and Dailymotion. But there are always some episodes missing.
this is just the American part of the war. vietnam saw near-constant fighting or unrest in some form from 1940 through 1991. Japan, France, the American War (really a Vietnamese Civil War), Cambodia, and China.
According to histotians, most of south Vietnam (beside its capital) was under vietcong control. This map make it look like a standard war between 2 countries with well defined border, its BS. There is no timestamp, no source for the data used.
I might as well ask a toddlerr to draw south asia and put some flag over it.
Generally, all major cities in south Vietnam were controlled by the South. The more sparsely populated and traditional rural areas generally supported the north because of the South’s persecution of Buddhists, as well as a general mistrust of foreigners thanks to the Vietnam’s history of colonial oppressors.
You make it sound like it was Saigon VS the rest of Vietnam when that’s really not the case. There’s a reason the North Vietnamese needed to launch a giant offensive against every major city in the south. I’d also add that the Tet Offensive failed militarily by all metrics, but was a huge propaganda success, as it revealed to the American public that the government hadn’t been entirely truthful about how much we had failed to weaken the North with search and destroy.
It’s impossible to win a war when you voluntarily give up strategic points that you’ve spent time, money, and lives to take for no discernible reason.
If that’s accurate, that’s an epic stalemate. Nearly nothing has changed, territory-wise, since invasion. Russia took a couple provinces in the east and nothing has changed since.
Sort of. They defeated the northern invasion force and managed to push the southern forces back past the Dnipro river, and you can see the liberation of Kharkiv and the surrounding region in the northeast. But between literal trench warfare and the terrain being generally unfavorable for vehicles most of the year, neither side can make much progress.
You can never have an honest portrayal of the Vietnam war without including the level of saturation bombings by the US on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. More explosives dropped than the entire pacific theatre of WW2 INCLUDING the two atomic bombs. Laos to this day is the most densely bombed country in history. Literally just deleting grid squares on a map.
Granted this was a real war, looks awfully like my wars in Civ6 when I tried to invade another territory way too early. I make no ground and faster than I can take them out the enemy bolsters their defenses.
The saddest part is that the ones that started this war didn’t give a shit who won or lost, that was never the point for them. Their kids didn’t fight or die in it, they only profited.
I was about to say how pointless all that bloodshed was, then I remembered my Vietnamese wife’s grandpa gained US citizenship after fighting and being imprisoned. He then was allowed to petition for them to come many years later. My family wouldn’t have existed
*Charlie didn't get much USO. He was dug in too deep or moving too fast. His idea of a great R&R was cold rice and a little rat meat. He had only two ways home: death, or victory.*
Yes, over 300,000 Chinese soldiers served in North Vietnam throughout the course of the war, mostly in anti-aircraft, railroad, and engineering (construction) units.
There was a secret war, pseudo-war, taking place in neighboring Laos at the same time. Because Laos was technically "neutral" everything happening there was kept silent.
The CIA had recruited hilltribe people who lived in the mountains of Laos to protect secret supply lines, rescue downed pilots, and be a group of dark operatives for the United States. Hundreds of thousands of these people fought and died during this war.
Damn...that really is interesting. Seeing the conflict from a bird's eye view feels like playing a game of Risk. You can see where the holes in the defense were, how they tried to close the gaps, and then how everything went wild.
Essentially the US bombed North Vietnam to the peace table and got the war to end. Then the US withdrew and the North reneged on the peace treaty and swamped the south.
I live in Vietnam now. Most descendants of communists want nothing more but to start a new life in the U.S. They love South Korean TV shows, they love U.S. movies, they love Japanese, Korean and U.S. fashion. When a Vietnamese person is beautiful. They say they look Korean, when they’re ugly, they say they look North Korean. And the country is totally capitalist. The communist North Vietnamese lost the war, but they didn’t lose because of bombs, they lost because their culture and ideals were inferior to their opponents and eventually their people realized it.
what the fuck are you talking about
>They love South Korean TV shows, they love U.S. movies, they love Japanese, Korean and U.S. fashion.
Like the rest of the world?
> When a Vietnamese person is beautiful. They say they look Korean, when they’re ugly, they say they look North Korean.
literaly nobody said this. Nghe ở đâu đấy?
It's almost as if the war is for independence and people want to carry on, make money. But fuck that right, you love US movie, therefore you lose right
\[The communist North Vietnamese lost the war\]
What?! Communists occupied the entire country and even neighboring Laos and Cambodia fell to communists at the end of the war :)
US and Allies lost the war, period. Winning big battles on the field doesn't mean anything, which the allies did alright. What matters is the ultimate result.
Three of my uncles fought in Vietnam. All of them in different parts of the country but all said the same thing. As far as fighting the Vietcong, militarily speaking, we were mopping the floor with them. Yet for every victory, politicians began putting restrictions on everything they could do out of fear of harming a representative from another nation that was advising the other side. By the time they were coming home, they felt like they had both hands tied behind their back with a blindfold while on one foot and expected to participate in an ass kicking contest.
Very stupid war for the US to get involved it. Hubris was their downfall. It was a civil war with an overlay of Communism and the Cold War. The North/VC losses were appalling and it did nothing for the US other than perhaps allowing Thailand to rebuild and draining the Soviet coffers.
this is what happens when you fight an enemy that very genuinely just doesnt want to be occupied. a lesson america extremely comprehensively failed to learn.
Wasn't America trying to keep the North from capturing the south? Meaning we were not occupying a nation that didn't want us there, but failing to defend the people who actually did?
Who was that flag in Thailand? that separate red section that was there the entire time. and why did Cambodia not get completely taken over by Vietnam? or why where they part of that of it? The same with Laos?
If every historical occurrence of this nature was shown to me first like this I would have wanted to know EVERYthing about it in school. (Edit: I said that to say kudos, this is rad)
Read about how ruthless the South Korean soldiers were. During Tet, they were not attacked as the VC/PAVN didn’t want that work and feared how ruthless they were
Why is there no date stamp in this map? I take it the Tet Offensive was around the 30:00 mark?
I'm an oblivious person, I probably should know more about where this all is and the country flags, but if you don't know this stuff you learn nothing from this video. It just looks cool. Country names and flags key would be nice. Yes I suck I don't know
You not knowing doesn't suck, You knowing you not knowing, and wanting to not know would
The red vlag with a yellow star is vietnam. The yellowish flag does not represent a country. I presume it is a flag of a joint force. The flag with 5 horizontal lines is Thailand. The blue-red-blue flag with a castle in the middle is Cambodia. We also have American flags. The white one with a dot in the middle and 4 black details in the corner is south korea. The blue/red one with a white dot in the middle is Laos. Later on we have some (I think) Australian flags, but I did not get a good look. And then there is the red/blue flag with a star in the middle which probably is a combination of Vietnam and some other country, or it was a flag tha doesnt exist anymore in the modern day.
The yellow flag represents the RVN (South Vietnam Republic). The blue Cambodian flag is the Kingdom of Cambodia, which was then replaced by the Khmer Republic. The red flag with the yellow temple later in the vid is Khmer Rouge (that genocidal one). The half blue, half red Vietnamese flag is the National Liberation Front. This is the infamous Viet Cong guerrilla force.
Did you pull all of that out of your ass?
Pretty much
Not all learning materials are intended for all levels. I've you've been inspired to learn more…good.
It appears that way, and the Easter offensive likely at 52 second mark with the slight push by North Vietnam prior to complete withdrawal of US and SK forces
It's a portrait crop of[ this landscape video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_glcuOZ8Sg) which has the dates. 0:30 is in 1965, the Tet offensive would be around 0:38 and doesn't really show up much on this map.
That escalated quickly.
Never get in a land war in Asia.
Never fight uphill, me boys.
They were fighting uphill.
He said, "wow, that was a big mistake."
They did not have the high ground
Don’t do it Anakin!
Hill 357 aka Hambuger Hill.. Great film
Never go with a hippy to a second location
This is more of a don’t fight the people on their territory. They know the land and how to use it. Goes with every war the US has recently fought and lost since the Vietnam war.
Tunnel networks play a large factor. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria... so many unknown tunnel networks with supplies, traps, shelter. And only the locals know them.
Vietnam wasn't supposed to be a war. Americans were supposed to be peace keepers teaching the Vietnamese how to defend themselves against communism. Didn't work out that way. Many of the Vietnamese, Cambodian, fighters from the Phillipines armies did not want to fight. *(Don't even start. I said some, not all, & I happen to think that, historically, America has been pulled in to "humanitarian crisis" that we shouldn't have poked our troops or money into. Period.)* Initial skirmishes with the NVA moved the American teachers into American fighters. America in the conflict as an aggressor would kick off by a mistake in the Gulf of Tonkin. The prior 50 years had seen America in 3 previous wars. Americans were weary of war & while Americans had seen images from the Civil War, WWI, Korea, WWII...they really weren't prepared for the daily & live coverage of this war. They had no stomach for it. Coverage had also changed. Prior wars were presented as *"Americans fighting the red scourge!"*, *"Rah, rah, yah...get 'em boys"* & Americans supported the troops. By the time Vietnam rolled around, the press portrayed this conflict differently & in so doing, American attitudes changed too. Americans balked at sending forces to die in a land where (initially) it's own people wouldn't fight for. Lyndon Johnson certainly didn't inspire a reason, any reason to send troops & by the time Nixon was in the mix...even his advisors didn't trust him. Most can tell you the American cost was over 58,000 troops. But in those almost 20 yrs, we had sent almost 3 million Americans into war. South Vietnam sent a total of 1.5 million. No other country came remotely close to those numbers. Yet more than 2 million died in this "proxy war".
Every war US fought since then was a limited engagement. You can clearly see in the video that there was no intention to attack NV territory - and this is the main factor. You can’t win a fight if you don’t engage in full.
>This is more of a don’t fight the people on their territory. They know the land and how to use it. The homefield advantage the NVA/VC had has been vastly exaggerated. Much of the fighting was in the jungle and/or mountains where almost nobody lived, the NVA/VC had no more of an advantage fighting there than an American would have fighting in Yellowstone. And of course in the fighting taking place in the more populated areas the NVA/VC were more familiar with the terrain and of course language than the Americans, but that ignores the South Vietnamese who knew it just as well as them, and in many cases better than the majority of the NVA/VC who were born and raised in North Vietnam, hundreds of miles away from where they ended up fighting in South Vietnam where the majority of the South Vietnamese were fighting in the province they grew up in or a neighboring province.
but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line"! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha...
Iocane powder, I'd bet my life on it
As you wish.
Ello! My name is Anigo Montolla. You killed my father. Prepare to-die!
Aaaaaaaaasssssssssss yooooooooouuuuuuu wwwiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiishhhhhhh!!
HOI4 players have this tattooed on their arms
And most of all never bet with a scillian when death is on the line .
You can see the American and Korean flags slowly slip away and then it all collapses.
Yup. Like the diarrhea after eating something rancid.
I was born in '67 and I never knew South Korea participated in the Vietnam War.
It’s a crazy forgotten part of history. Basically being so poor SK offered troops for the meat grinder in Vietnam in return for economic aid. And it wasn’t a handful of soldiers, they sent 350000 soldiers. Fascinating part of the Cold War world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea_in_the_Vietnam_War
And their reputation was particularly brutal.
Care to elaborate to someone who knows almost 0 about the war?
The Americans never really had their heart in the conflict, most soldiers were jaded and wondering why they were even there in the first place. The South Koreans however were fervently opposed to communism because of what they’d just recently went through with their own civil war, so ideologically they were fanatical. This led to them committing numerous war crimes, stuff that makes My Lai look reasonable in comparison.
I get what you’re trying to say but I’d be careful with how you’ve characterized My Lai in comparison.
I want to emphasize just how bad the South Koreans treated the Vietnamese, and not just killings but the cruelty they displayed. I’m talking ripping off breasts of teenage women, babies on spikes, massacres ranging into the thousands. Don’t take my previous comment as downplaying My Lai, but as elevating the crimes against humanity perpetrated by the South Koreans.
Ahh no wonder they don't even want to say they were there.
[удалено]
There's a beast in every man, and it stirs when you put an M1 Garand in his hand.
lol "The main reason the Korean war was so bad was because of the brutality of the south Koreans" I guess all North Korean were saints.
In short there was a lot of sexual violence (as is the case with most occupying armies). To this day there's a large population of Korean-Vietnamese who are badly stigmatized within Vietnam and continue to seek compensation from the Korean government: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/may/28/children-of-vietnam-wars-survivors-unjustly-bear-the-burden-of-others-crimes They also just killed quite a lot of people: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-court-orders-first-compensation-vietnam-war-victim-2023-02-07/
It bugs me that in that first article, she translated "lai đại hàn" as "mixed blood", but it specifically means "Korean hybrid (like a mule)". These days, Korean hybrids are viewed with admiration and perhaps jealousy here in Vietnam, but I will say that institutions here discriminate against women and children in cases where the father is unknown or the mother wasn't married. I think that's where the bias comes into play against that specific group.
Ken Burn's documentary series The Vietnam War is one of the best documentaries I've ever seen, I highly recommend it.
Amazing doco
350000 wow
Also Australia and New Zealand and Russia
Australia had over 60,000 troops over the span of the war so it's a little surprising that their flag doesn't show up but I guess they might not have been concentrated enough.
It is weird as Australian forces had responsibility for a whole province from about 1966 onwards.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGDhzVi1bqU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGDhzVi1bqU) Obligatory Aussie Vietnam war song if anyone hasn't heard it
I have to verify my age so I can't see what song it is. Is it "Keh Sanh" by Cold Chisel?
nah its "i was only 19" by Redgum
Thanks
battle of long tan
*Soviet Union. Half the people mentioning the USSR call it by one of its 15 regions. Stop saying Russia
Even Stalin called The Great Patriotic War a Russian victory.
There are two words in the Russian language: the first one used to call an ethnicity and the second one for nationality. In the Soviet time you can be ethnically Russian and a Soviet citizen. But people used Russian in the meaning of ethnicity really more often than they should do. In terms of Stalin's speech he used "Russian as ethnicity" for basically Soviet people. Idk the ideology behind that, but think about it as about major people in the Soviet Union. For example: 1/9 of Belarusian population was killed in the second world war. So yeah, it's more "Soviet victory" in terms of that era.
Soviet Union was essentially just another form of colonial Russian Empire, so calling it Russia is definitely not wrong. Calling all the Soviets Russians would be absolutely wrong, tho, and if used in a wrong time in a wrong place that disapproval could arrive with physical punctuation. Yes we absolutely take it seriously enough.
Russians culturally, economically, and militarily dominated the USSR. That’s why even Stalin referred to WW2 as a Russian victory.
It was victory for Stalin. Stalin united with Britain & the USA to take on Nazi Germany. Absolutely considered a Russian victory. When the heads of state sat down to decide the spoils of war, there were 3 - Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt. Vietnam was a proxy war. More the US against Russia than countries trying to unify Vietnam. Edit...misspelling
Excellent point regarding your comment of a Proxy war.
Austrailia sent 50,190 total troops. Peak: 8,300 combat troops. New Zealand sent 552 troops in 1968.
[удалено]
They committed some pretty notorious war crimes as well.
I read somewhere that the north hated fighting them.
They're notorious for being extremely brutal and savage towards POWs and civilians alike. My grandpa said we tried to capture American POWs (for peace negotiation leverage) but for Korean it's instant execution, no exception.
I guess after having been through their own brutal war, they weren’t too keen on being sympathetic towards any communists
Not being sympathetic is one thing, S.Korean soldiers were literally like the Japanese at Nanjing. An estimation of 9000 civilians were killed, according to Busan Ilbo, there are at least 5000 and as many as 30,000 Vietnamese-Korean mixed children born during the war as results of rape. They also refuse to acknowledge any atrocities committed. The closest thing we had was when Moon Jae-in expressed "regrets over an unfortunate past".
It was a do or die. They went for recognition and economic aid. They also had a score to settle with the communists after the Korean War. I'm sure the North hated them because they fought for a purpose. Americans did not.
>I'm sure the North hated them because they fought for a purpose. That and the mass rape and murdering
Yea, and so did the North and the USA. My Lai massacre. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Cong_and_People%27s_Army_of_Vietnam_use_of_terror_in_the_Vietnam_War
One thing that I think we Americans get wrong about the Vietnam war is the classification of everyone as Viet Cong. Technically only the flags you see in the South west tip that are surrounded for most of the war are the VC. They were helped and supported by the north but in the beginning it was very much two separate fronts.
This was something I didn’t learn until embarrassingly late into my own research on The Vietnam War. (Having never been taught much about it at all in my education). For so many sources, the VC and North Vietnamese seemed interchangeable— their distinction wasn’t made clear to me for some time. (Edit: I believe it was finally clarified for me while watching the Ken Burns Vietnam documentary)
I just rewatched the Ken Burns documentary series. Never again until it happens again...
Its so good. So so good. War documentaries have become my absolute favorite genre. The amount of hours Ive spent watching WW2 doc series in particular.
Wait until you hear about WW1! (It’s my favorite one to watch documentaries about)
Im actually weirdly uninterested in WW1. Horses, gasmasks, and trenches just doesnt cut it for me. I dont really understand why, but WW2 seems to be where my historical interest begins. Anything after that Im good with. Probably has a lot to do with the lack of footage prior to WW2. I could claim it's because WW2 has so many faciniting elements; an evermoving frontline in multiple counties, alliances changing throughout, obscene political extremism, human suffering beyond imagination, leaps in technological and mechanical innovation during the war. But.. the Vietnam War dowsnt have these elements (for the most part) and I still find that to be absolute top shelf doc theme as well. So I think its down to lack od footage, and the fact that I just cant relate to the WW1 era the way I can to WW2 and beyond. Maybe it will come with age. More age. Fuck Im already middle-aged, how the heck did that happen.
I think the fascinating parts of WW1 are all about the insane speed warfare evolved (specifically with regards to artillery - they were using 18lb guns in the 1880s). In the early battles of the war they were lining up and marching into machine gun fire. The other aspect is the human experience component. Absolutely atrocious conditions in the trenches. Completely unlike anything humans have experienced before or since.
This is exactly why I’m fascinated by it. They were figuring out how to fight in real time and the results of that were astonishing. Entire air forces were created during the war. There were soldiers who saw tanks before knowing they existed. There were days where tens of thousands of bombs exploded each and every hour.
Don’t forget chemical warfare. Imagine breathing in mustard gas not knowing what’s going on and then your lungs fill up with fluid and your skin starts to blister and bubble 🫧
No...i actually dont want to imagine.. But i get what u say.
It’s just media shaping your perception of events. Read about WW1 and the Korean War to put WW2 in perspective, and you’ll gain more appreciation for the history of all 3
You should try watching Apocalypse WWI and WWI in numbers. You can find both on YouTube.
Would you mind sharing where you watched it?
It is hard to find for free or cheap unfortunately. I bought it on Amazon for 10€ (German audio only in Germany) and watched some episodes on YouTube and Dailymotion. But there are always some episodes missing.
The correct soundtrack doesn't suposed to be Fortunate Son?
Or For What its Worth
Or paranoid?
Indeed, I came to make this comment. Love the Stones, but they've got bog all to do with Vietnam...
You put that specific rolling Stones song instead of the other one...
Paint it Black >
What is the timeline?
I'm pretty sure I know when the Tet Offensive happened, some pretty substantial gains for the North
looks like 59-75.
16 years. Damn.
this is just the American part of the war. vietnam saw near-constant fighting or unrest in some form from 1940 through 1991. Japan, France, the American War (really a Vietnamese Civil War), Cambodia, and China.
According to histotians, most of south Vietnam (beside its capital) was under vietcong control. This map make it look like a standard war between 2 countries with well defined border, its BS. There is no timestamp, no source for the data used. I might as well ask a toddlerr to draw south asia and put some flag over it.
Generally, all major cities in south Vietnam were controlled by the South. The more sparsely populated and traditional rural areas generally supported the north because of the South’s persecution of Buddhists, as well as a general mistrust of foreigners thanks to the Vietnam’s history of colonial oppressors. You make it sound like it was Saigon VS the rest of Vietnam when that’s really not the case. There’s a reason the North Vietnamese needed to launch a giant offensive against every major city in the south. I’d also add that the Tet Offensive failed militarily by all metrics, but was a huge propaganda success, as it revealed to the American public that the government hadn’t been entirely truthful about how much we had failed to weaken the North with search and destroy. It’s impossible to win a war when you voluntarily give up strategic points that you’ve spent time, money, and lives to take for no discernible reason.
Can someone do one of these to show the situation in Ukraine from start to current date? I’m a visual processor. This format is great!
https://youtu.be/W6X_kSmByn0?si=srNMRnRbwuUSWCwA Here you go
If that’s accurate, that’s an epic stalemate. Nearly nothing has changed, territory-wise, since invasion. Russia took a couple provinces in the east and nothing has changed since.
Sort of. They defeated the northern invasion force and managed to push the southern forces back past the Dnipro river, and you can see the liberation of Kharkiv and the surrounding region in the northeast. But between literal trench warfare and the terrain being generally unfavorable for vehicles most of the year, neither side can make much progress.
Pretty much. It’s become a war of attrition. Ukraine needs to essentially outlast Russia’s soviet era stockpile of equipment.
ww1 is so back.
Thank you!
Time to learn about the shrimp boat business.
I hear them Vietnams is guud shrumpin..
Shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes....
Cocktail shrimp, fried shrimp, shrimp bubblegum…
War is a racket and we got into this particular war (and others)under false pretenses
All wars are civil wars, for all men are brothers
Except for the assholes at the top who initiate these wars for their own self interests and the interests of those around them
"What's so civil about war anyway?"
You can never have an honest portrayal of the Vietnam war without including the level of saturation bombings by the US on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. More explosives dropped than the entire pacific theatre of WW2 INCLUDING the two atomic bombs. Laos to this day is the most densely bombed country in history. Literally just deleting grid squares on a map.
Granted this was a real war, looks awfully like my wars in Civ6 when I tried to invade another territory way too early. I make no ground and faster than I can take them out the enemy bolsters their defenses.
Especially if you play against Vietnam.
Fact: The background music for anything Vietnam war is "Fortunate Son"
I CAN'T GET NO
McArthur would have taken a different approach! I mean, it may have started WWIII. But it wouldn’t have been fought so far south!
Do you have one for the Korean War?
They'll make one once it's ended.
War, what is it good for?? Absolutely nothing. Edwin Starr.
Tbf, we get pretty innovative when it comes to killing each other. We owe much of our technological advances to war
The saddest part is that the ones that started this war didn’t give a shit who won or lost, that was never the point for them. Their kids didn’t fight or die in it, they only profited.
This is really cool, just wishing it had dates alongside
This needs dates
The ending 😳
Really shows how pointless the US involvement was. As soon as they left it collapsed.
I still don't get why the US got involved, they literally sacrificed their youth for nothing.
That tet offensive was something
I was about to say how pointless all that bloodshed was, then I remembered my Vietnamese wife’s grandpa gained US citizenship after fighting and being imprisoned. He then was allowed to petition for them to come many years later. My family wouldn’t have existed
Communists in Zerg attack mode
Interesting visual representation. Curious how it was completed.
Wrong song from the rolling stones
So the communists could’ve captured Saigon before the US got involved?
Someone help me out here, what was the US's goal for vietnam? Ive heard so many different things.
To stop another communist power from emerging.
Love these. Really help you visualize how it happened
Vietnam. Undefeated
Holy fuck man, reading thrugh this comment section while Mariage d'amour is playing is something else
*Charlie didn't get much USO. He was dug in too deep or moving too fast. His idea of a great R&R was cold rice and a little rat meat. He had only two ways home: death, or victory.*
Charlie don't surf!
Didn’t North Vietnam use Chinese soldiers as well?
Yes, over 300,000 Chinese soldiers served in North Vietnam throughout the course of the war, mostly in anti-aircraft, railroad, and engineering (construction) units.
So it was a conflict involving territory like Korean war, why was the US not able to win ?
How does someone make a map like this?
The man in the black pajamas, Dude. Worthy f***in' adversary.
There was a secret war, pseudo-war, taking place in neighboring Laos at the same time. Because Laos was technically "neutral" everything happening there was kept silent. The CIA had recruited hilltribe people who lived in the mountains of Laos to protect secret supply lines, rescue downed pilots, and be a group of dark operatives for the United States. Hundreds of thousands of these people fought and died during this war.
Wow. The Ho Chi Minh trail really fucked the south
Damn...that really is interesting. Seeing the conflict from a bird's eye view feels like playing a game of Risk. You can see where the holes in the defense were, how they tried to close the gaps, and then how everything went wild.
Impresionante Vietnam venciendo varios ejércitos fascistas.
Wow, the end was that quick!
Essentially the US bombed North Vietnam to the peace table and got the war to end. Then the US withdrew and the North reneged on the peace treaty and swamped the south.
What a waste of time, money, blood, sweat, and tears.
And the secret war happened at the end of this. Making Laos the most bombed country in history.
I live in Vietnam now. Most descendants of communists want nothing more but to start a new life in the U.S. They love South Korean TV shows, they love U.S. movies, they love Japanese, Korean and U.S. fashion. When a Vietnamese person is beautiful. They say they look Korean, when they’re ugly, they say they look North Korean. And the country is totally capitalist. The communist North Vietnamese lost the war, but they didn’t lose because of bombs, they lost because their culture and ideals were inferior to their opponents and eventually their people realized it.
Stop spreading false information
btw if Vietnam is that bad, why did you come and stay?
what the fuck are you talking about >They love South Korean TV shows, they love U.S. movies, they love Japanese, Korean and U.S. fashion. Like the rest of the world? > When a Vietnamese person is beautiful. They say they look Korean, when they’re ugly, they say they look North Korean. literaly nobody said this. Nghe ở đâu đấy? It's almost as if the war is for independence and people want to carry on, make money. But fuck that right, you love US movie, therefore you lose right
No you don't lol 😆
Vietnam is far from "capitalist".
\[The communist North Vietnamese lost the war\] What?! Communists occupied the entire country and even neighboring Laos and Cambodia fell to communists at the end of the war :) US and Allies lost the war, period. Winning big battles on the field doesn't mean anything, which the allies did alright. What matters is the ultimate result.
Three of my uncles fought in Vietnam. All of them in different parts of the country but all said the same thing. As far as fighting the Vietcong, militarily speaking, we were mopping the floor with them. Yet for every victory, politicians began putting restrictions on everything they could do out of fear of harming a representative from another nation that was advising the other side. By the time they were coming home, they felt like they had both hands tied behind their back with a blindfold while on one foot and expected to participate in an ass kicking contest.
Very stupid war for the US to get involved it. Hubris was their downfall. It was a civil war with an overlay of Communism and the Cold War. The North/VC losses were appalling and it did nothing for the US other than perhaps allowing Thailand to rebuild and draining the Soviet coffers.
Yet in the end, vietnam even kicked china's ass after this war when the latter invaded, and would go on to become a US ally.
this is what happens when you fight an enemy that very genuinely just doesnt want to be occupied. a lesson america extremely comprehensively failed to learn.
Wasn't America trying to keep the North from capturing the south? Meaning we were not occupying a nation that didn't want us there, but failing to defend the people who actually did?
Now that was fun
Who appeared in the reddish area towards the bottom left at 0:23 seconds left?
Doesn’t even look like it was close…
Does anyone knows how to make these presentation?
Damn I didn't realise how much bluefor got fked
Who was that flag in Thailand? that separate red section that was there the entire time. and why did Cambodia not get completely taken over by Vietnam? or why where they part of that of it? The same with Laos?
Where’s the credits
The first American flag popping in like "hey, what's going on here?? Hey fellas, check this out"
If every historical occurrence of this nature was shown to me first like this I would have wanted to know EVERYthing about it in school. (Edit: I said that to say kudos, this is rad)
At first I thought that YouTube declared a war against some nation.
The Oversimplified way! But what software/application is used to simulate this?
Don't know Cambodia was taken as well?
Well, that escalated quickly...
Damn the North rolled a lot of sizes at the end there.
That Ho Chi Minh Trail through Cambodia. Man
Hmmm. Looks like the war was as dumb as I always thought.
Read about how ruthless the South Korean soldiers were. During Tet, they were not attacked as the VC/PAVN didn’t want that work and feared how ruthless they were
Where would one even get raw data for something like this and how would that data look?
"Charlie don't surf!"
Particularly fascinating when you watch this through the lens of energy. It’s really just energy vs energy.
Wow. The north really did invade the south.