I was thinking the same thing.usmarine2005 wrote:
Bay of Pigs was a war?
Poll
Which was the most futile US-fought war?
| World War I | 1% | 1% - 3 | ||||
| World War II | 3% | 3% - 5 | ||||
| Gulf War I | 1% | 1% - 2 | ||||
| Iraqi Invasion | 18% | 18% - 30 | ||||
| Afghan Invasion | 0% | 0% - 1 | ||||
| Vietnam War | 47% | 47% - 78 | ||||
| Korean War | 3% | 3% - 5 | ||||
| Bay of Pigs Invasion | 15% | 15% - 25 | ||||
| Grenada Invasion | 1% | 1% - 3 | ||||
| Other | 6% | 6% - 11 | ||||
| Total: 163 | ||||||
If Bay of Pigs was a US war, then the Deathstar was blown up for real in the Star Wars
It's because it wasn't. It was just another example of the US Government Standing up to the evil men of this world. Someone has to do it. Many don't like us for this fact. I think this whole post is futile, as every single conflict in mankind's existence, weather avoidable or not, is a part of life. None were futile. Null vote.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I don't remember that being a war.usmarine2005 wrote:
Bay of Pigs was a war?
Correction for the OP. Free of charge.
World War I
World War II
Gulf War I
Iraqi Invasion War
Afghan Invasion War
Vietnam War
Korean War
Bay of Pigs Invasion
Grenada Invasion
escuse me?? you guys didn't show up untill AFTER the battle of brittan ie: not untill the war was already won all that was needed was clean up of a stubburn enemy.Braddock wrote:
On the whole WWII issue ...you know Britain helped in the defeat of Germany, as did the Russians? I don't want to detract from what was a great American victory but don't try and hog all the glory.
get your facts straight buddy and once you get into 5th grade history mabie just mabie you won't have americanised history books (not bloody likley)
Or just another example of fostering dissidence through malcontents then leaving them out to dry with no logistical/political support when the shit hits the fan (1991 Kurds).(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
It's because it wasn't. It was just another example of the US Government Standing up to the evil men of this world. Someone has to do it.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I don't remember that being a war.usmarine2005 wrote:
Bay of Pigs was a war?
I couldn't agree more. Circa late 70's, 20 something Osama Bin Laden, in the mountains of Afghanistan.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Or just another example of fostering dissidence through malcontents then leaving them out to dry with no logistical/political support when the shit hits the fan (1991 Kurds).(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
It's because it wasn't. It was just another example of the US Government Standing up to the evil men of this world. Someone has to do it.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I don't remember that being a war.
It seems I stand corrected about this post. That was a futile involvement in their culture. Later lead to a War, that will be hot-as-coals for many years, sadly.
My question about futile wars lead by the US. What is your point in making a post based like this CameronPoe?
Oh you know why.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
My question about futile wars lead by the US. What is your point in making a post based like this CameronPoe?
The war on drugs.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
LOL... Ok.. you got me on that one. I retract my previous answer...Kmarion wrote:
The war on drugs.
Turq, I was just looking at the last posts in this section and seeing a common phenomenon: all of them made by you. Since I wasn't doing anything more important, I took the opportunity to do this in MS Paint...
and iraq seems to be heading down that road..Turquoise wrote:
Vietnam was utterly ridiculous.. It never should have been fought, and it was an even dumber move than the invasion of Iraq....
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.
You need to settle down and realize that if the United States hadn't stepped in the war, you guys would most likely all be speaking German by now.manitobapaintballa wrote:
get your facts straight buddy and once you get into 5th grade history mabie just mabie you won't have americanised history books (not bloody likley)
I'm glad you realize LBJ messed it up with his crap ideas, but know also that when the NVA came storming through, every single son of em south vietnamese immediately wished they had their American allies. It was an ironic war, because the US was always telling the SV what would happen if invaded, and then when that actually happened, other countries saw it, and they knew to steer clear of communism or else.Turquoise wrote:
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.
The Vietnamese were vicious buggers. One eyewitness reports a tank rolling a Church and blowing the refugees inside up until the church was a bloody mess.
The Communist Vietnamese obliterated their cities pretty much, and deported everyone to the countryside to work in labor camps, similar to Kim Il Jom's today. The country was brain wiped and washed or else purged.
The war did prove something else : democrats are shit at defending the United States/waging any sort of war.
Last edited by The_Mac (2007-06-20 19:38:53)
My goodness dude. You are lecturing someone about going back to a 5th grade level? Look at your post more closely. I would say your spelling and thought is below a 3rd grade level at best.manitobapaintballa wrote:
escuse me?? you guys didn't show up untill AFTER the battle of brittan ie: not untill the war was already won all that was needed was clean up of a stubburn enemy.Braddock wrote:
On the whole WWII issue ...you know Britain helped in the defeat of Germany, as did the Russians? I don't want to detract from what was a great American victory but don't try and hog all the glory.
get your facts straight buddy and once you get into 5th grade history mabie just mabie you won't have americanised history books (not bloody likley)
To be honest, I wouldn't call this one futile. Sure it was bad; we were killing each other. BUT it solved the issue of slavery in territories once and for all. (I guess technically you could say it was the 13,14,15th Amendments, but without the victory, those probably would never have been passed.) It almost cemented the bonds between the states IMO.Vernedead wrote:
the civil war! nothing more futile than killing your own.
I voted Vietnam btw. Our support there was next to nil, the people kept getting lied to (Cambodia), etc.
Bay of pigs it fucked our image over for the international community
"ohh brother ohh brother what are we fighting for....?"Vernedead wrote:
the civil war! nothing more futile than killing your own.
but seriously the vietnam war, bay of pigs, the cuban missle crisis just made the international community looked with digust on america; just ruined the "good" image
AHAHAHAHAHA! Standing up to the good guys lollar. I'm sure the whole cold war was just the US standing up for freedom and justice and defending democracy from the 'iron curtain', right? Bay of Pigs was an attempted war, and an utter failure. The monumentousness of the defeat justifies its presence in the list.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
It's because it wasn't. It was just another example of the US Government Standing up to the evil men of this world. Someone has to do it. Many don't like us for this fact.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I don't remember that being a war.usmarine2005 wrote:
Bay of Pigs was a war?
If you are going to give grief over Vietnam, at least aim it in the right directions. Toward Eisenhower, for sending observers. To Kennedy, for upping troop levels and actually beginning the real involvement. To the French, for mismanaging the place so badly as to have the situation develop. There is plenty of blame to spread around.Turquoise wrote:
Vietnam was utterly ridiculous.. It never should have been fought, and it was an even dumber move than the invasion of Iraq....
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.
Besides, you have to look at conflicts from the point of view avaiable at the time. How much do you personally remember of Vietnam, to have such attitudes over it?
I mean, in retrospect, it was pretty bad, and worthless. But the reasons we were over there may have made some sort of sense at the time; at least to the policy makers.
Why not just extend your argument to: "If we were allowed to nuke them we would have won!"?PsychoKillers wrote:
The only reason Vietnam went down faster then a lead titanic was that there were so many ROEs and the U.S. couldnt use its military to its full extent. If we were able to bomb North Vietnam more and do something about Cambodia then we may have won.Turquoise wrote:
Vietnam was utterly ridiculous.. It never should have been fought, and it was an even dumber move than the invasion of Iraq....
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.
Yeah, cemeted the bonds between the states by destroying states rights and begining the buildup to the overwhelmin national goverment we have today. And it may have finished the slavery issue, but that is not what started it.Smithereener wrote:
To be honest, I wouldn't call this one futile. Sure it was bad; we were killing each other. BUT it solved the issue of slavery in territories once and for all. (I guess technically you could say it was the 13,14,15th Amendments, but without the victory, those probably would never have been passed.) It almost cemented the bonds between the states IMO.Vernedead wrote:
the civil war! nothing more futile than killing your own.
I voted Vietnam btw. Our support there was next to nil, the people kept getting lied to (Cambodia), etc.
Seriously, I have nothing more to add, however there is utterly no comparison. Stay on topic. We're supposed to be talking about how futile the US war machine is, to CameronPoetthf wrote:
and iraq seems to be heading down that road..Turquoise wrote:
Vietnam was utterly ridiculous.. It never should have been fought, and it was an even dumber move than the invasion of Iraq....
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.
Because it does not need to be extended further. How about Korea, where the American military was not allowed to push all the way through the country, having to stop early for political reasons? We can all see the result of that decision.jonsimon wrote:
Why not just extend your argument to: "If we were allowed to nuke them we would have won!"?PsychoKillers wrote:
The only reason Vietnam went down faster then a lead titanic was that there were so many ROEs and the U.S. couldnt use its military to its full extent. If we were able to bomb North Vietnam more and do something about Cambodia then we may have won.Turquoise wrote:
Vietnam was utterly ridiculous.. It never should have been fought, and it was an even dumber move than the invasion of Iraq....
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.
In Vietnam, every time an offensive was pushing the North Vietnamese back toward the edge of defeat, a cease fire was called as they negotiated while they rebuilt their strength. When they recovered enough to be a going concern again, they withdrew from the talks and started the fighting back up. The Americans lost the Vietnam war back in the United States with the American people. They did NOT lose it on the battleground.
im glad that was a joke lolParker wrote:
WWII.
saved a bunch of ungrateful, bitter people.
j/k
Oh, is that what it is? There is nothing futile about the "American War Machine" whatever that is except for a really creepy sounding label applied by people wanting to demonize the United States Military. All the military does is take orders from the chain of command. He should really be asking about the American political decisions to carry out military operations.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
Seriously, I have nothing more to add, however there is utterly no comparison. Stay on topic. We're supposed to be talking about how futile the US war machine is, to CameronPoetthf wrote:
and iraq seems to be heading down that road..Turquoise wrote:
Vietnam was utterly ridiculous.. It never should have been fought, and it was an even dumber move than the invasion of Iraq....
Why? Because it was an even more volatile location than Iraq, where our local support was even weaker than it is in Iraq. We lost thousands more men in Vietnam, and LBJ was even more of a tool than Bush, since his micromanagement of the war basically ruined any chance of victory whatsoever.