Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by giordano)
    Anyone would like to extend the argument to Korea?
    OK, I'll start:

    The US won in Korea, and now South Korea is rich and the North is poor, dictatorial and hungry.
    good point!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by giordano)
    Anyone would like to extend the argument to Korea?
    OK, I'll start:

    The US won in Korea, and now South Korea is rich and the North is poor, dictatorial and hungry.
    The Vietnam war acted as a Keynesian "kick-start" for the S Korean economy; the US bases there and the surplus from using S Korea as a base for vietnam (and paying for S Korean troops in Vietnam) made a big difference. S Korea may not have been quite as dictatorial as the North, but it was not until well into mthe 1980s it stopped being a dictatorship, and it was certainly poor and hungry until only recently as well.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by giordano)
    Anyone would like to extend the argument to Korea?
    OK, I'll start:

    The US won in Korea, and now South Korea is rich and the North is poor, dictatorial and hungry.
    im sorry, right now there isnt a dictator in south korea, but there was. South korea, in all its glory today, had really began democracy in 1982. The U.S. supported the local dictator and he was a brutal one, as bad or worse than north korea at the time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by canuck)
    im sorry, right now there isnt a dictator in south korea, but there was. South korea, in all its glory today, had really began democracy in 1982. The U.S. supported the local dictator and he was a brutal one, as bad or worse than north korea at the time.
    Yes, the US supported a dictator in South Korea (he was called Sygman Rhee). However, it was never a dictatorship comparable to Kim Il Sung's in North Korea; there were elections (rigged), opposition parties (more or less tolerated), and economic development started in the sixties. In short, people in the South have a 40-year advance as compared to the North
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Vietnam is my country and i always love it.we have a brilliant history that we are very proud of it.
    We defeated 2 big colonist:they are France and USA.most of the foriener historians said that Vietnam save the world to defeated th colonist.
    In the war,we are the first country in the world that defeated the US Army.It ia the big dark point in the US history.
    The US want to invade all over the world,in fact Korea,Saudi arabi,Philippin, Apghanixtan,Irag,Japan..... were invaded,The US Army has a lot of Solders in these countries.
    So I think that in the next 30 years, The US will invade Vietnam.They always dont leave this decision.
    If the war take place,I will ready protect my liberty and independence that The OLD Vietnamese were saved for us
    I can die for my country.I love The Vietnamese people.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cungdantinhyeu)
    In the war,we are the first country in the world that defeated the US Army.It ia the big dark point in the US history.
    Not true. The US army has been defeated on several occasions prior to Vietnam but yes its probably the darkest point in US military history (with Iraq a future contender.)
    (Original post by cungdantinhyeu)
    The US want to invade all over the world,in fact Korea,Saudi arabi,Philippin, Apghanixtan,Irag,Japan..... were invaded,The US Army has a lot of Solders in these countries.
    Not really.
    (Original post by cungdantinhyeu)
    So I think that in the next 30 years, The US will invade Vietnam.They always dont leave this decision.
    I cannot imagine a set of circumstances whereby the US would go anywhere near Vietnam again.
    (Original post by cungdantinhyeu)
    If the war take place,I will ready protect my liberty and independence that The OLD Vietnamese were saved for us
    I can die for my country.I love The Vietnamese people.
    You dont really have much to worry about.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    (with Iraq a future contender.)
    Future contender as in if 40,000 Americans die within the next future 24 days?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Why would the US invade Vietnam again? :confused:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    Future contender as in if 40,000 Americans die within the next future 24 days?
    Hush.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    Future contender as in if 40,000 Americans die within the next future 24 days?
    why 24 days? The US are going to be there for alot longer if the country is not to fall into a massive civil war between the religious fractions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    why 24 days? The US are going to be there for alot longer if the country is not to fall into a massive civil war between the religious fractions.
    24 days will hopefully see the beginning of a democratic Iraq. That already eclipses previous US losses and/or withdrawals that accounted for far more substantial casualty rates. While the situation in Iraq is tough, the only people that are selling this conflict as a losing and costly battle are the likes of the media. Unfortunately, their consistent rhetoric ends up as pessimism in the minds of those who are willing to pay attention in part. Any comparison of the casualty figures throughout history shows this campaign has been a cakewalk.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    why 24 days? The US are going to be there for alot longer if the country is not to fall into a massive civil war between the religious fractions.
    Then the Americans might well say "Fcuk this for a game of soldiers" and withdraw from Iraq.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    24 days will hopefully see the beginning of a democratic Iraq.
    No. It'll be seen as another meaningless milestone.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    24 days will hopefully see the beginning of a democratic Iraq. That already eclipses previous US losses and/or withdrawals that accounted for far more substantial casualty rates. While the situation in Iraq is tough, the only people that are selling this conflict as a losing and costly battle are the likes of the media. Unfortunately, their consistent rhetoric ends up as pessimism in the minds of those who are willing to pay attention in part. Any comparison of the casualty figures throughout history shows this campaign has been a cakewalk.
    sorry i realise that is when iraq become democratic (if all the leaders arent murdered). The USA is still going to be there and their soliders will still be dying. I dont see how their death count wont increase. (I am saying this with no relation to Vietnam)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    sorry i realise that is when iraq become democratic (if all the leaders arent murdered). The USA is still going to be there and their soliders will still be dying. I dont see how their death count wont increase. (I am saying this with no relation to Vietnam)
    These elections are farsical. Even the election monitors will apparently be doing their election monitoring from the safety of Yemen. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    These elections are farsical. Even the election monitors will apparently be doing their election monitoring from the safety of Yemen. :rolleyes:
    Wouldnt you? I personally would as I value my life.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    No. It'll be seen as another meaningless milestone.
    Like when Paul Bremer flew out of the country and the Iraqis started governing their country?
    Iraqis voting for their local councillors and elected government is meaningless? It may be of less practical consequence than we might hope, but its meaning to the Iraqi people and the US campaign is immense.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    (I am saying this with no relation to Vietnam)
    which is why history will not judge this Iraq conflict as being either a great mistake or a particuarly black day for the US military.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    These elections are farsical. Even the election monitors will apparently be doing their election monitoring from the safety of Yemen. :rolleyes:
    Thats the UN for you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    No. It'll be seen as another meaningless milestone.
    I think he probably means something to Bush, that the Iraq people will finally be free and happy dancing among the daisies. :rolleyes:
 
 
 
Poll
Who do you think it's more helpful to talk about mental health with?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.