Obama lifts US embargo on lethal arms sales to Vietnam

[Deleted]

Why would this turn this into a proxy war?

- - - Updated - - -



Why are you so stupid?

- - - Updated - - -



Should have included free movement to the US. xD

As Skroe has pointed out in a few of his posts, he doesn't mind proxy wars to achieve some sort of political goal. As he is delighted about the atrocious civil war going on in Syria cause it's "expensive for Russia", what makes you think the same kind of tactic won't be employed against China, at the expenses of nations like... Vietnam for example?

[Marcellus1986]

Well yeah, it's true. I'm sorry the truth hurts

The truth that you apparently can't source in any way, shape, or form.

[Deleted]

The truth that you apparently can't source in any way, shape, or form.

What are you talking about. Source what?

[Alakallanar]

Do you recall what I wrote about two years ago in the early Russia threads about the INF Treaty? I said at the time that as grave as Russia's illegal actions in Ukraine are, the INF Treaty violation is much worse.

I guess one could argue that the USA withdrawing from the ABM treaty in 2002 wasn't helpful either.

Let me put it this way. If China doesn't vacate the islands it's illegally claimed in the South China Sea by the end of the year, they should be evicted from it.

Agreed.

And pre-emptively, we should destroy (bomb, dismantle, bury, take your pick) every reef, shoal and rock they have yet to build on to prevent future expansion.

This, on the other hand, seems way too "enthusiastic" to me.

[Skroe]

I guess one could argue that the USA withdrawing from the ABM treaty in 2002 wasn't helpful either.

That's different though. ABM systems are defensive and the treaty wasn't a prototype for anything.

A Global Zero treaty would look pretty much exactly like the INF Treaty, for all ballistic missiles. We've lived the "what happens if one cheats" scenario.

I
This, on the other hand, seems way too "enthusiastic" to me.

It's not like anything other than sea life lives there.

[Deleted]

That's different though. ABM systems are defensive and the treaty wasn't a prototype for anything.

A Global Zero treaty would look pretty much exactly like the INF Treaty, for all ballistic missiles. We've lived the "what happens if one cheats" scenario.





It's not like anything other than sea life lives there.

I think he meant that it isn't possible to sink islands into the ocean by bombing them, it would require nuclear devices in the GT size range.

[Skroe]

I think he meant that it isn't possible to sink islands into the ocean by bombing them, it would require nuclear devices in the GT size range.

They're not islands. They're sand bars and reefs. You could do it with dredging ships, drills and explosives.

[Katie N]

As Skroe has pointed out in a few of his posts, he doesn't mind proxy wars to achieve some sort of political goal. As he is delighted about the atrocious civil war going on in Syria cause it's "expensive for Russia", what makes you think the same kind of tactic won't be employed against China, at the expenses of nations like... Vietnam for example?

I am not seeing what you mean. We are not syria.

[Deleted]

They're not islands. They're sand bars and reefs. You could do it with dredging ships, drills and explosives.

Thought you were talking about these:

[Deleted]

The truth that you apparently can't source in any way, shape, or form.

Try this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...years-ago.html

[Marcellus1986]

Try this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...years-ago.html

So how does something that happened 40 years ago have any relevance today? As far as I'm aware, the US has helped in efforts to clean the chemical from Vietnam and helped victims.

[Alakallanar]

They're not islands. They're sand bars and reefs. You could do it with dredging ships, drills and explosives.

The main problem I have is that it would probably be a diplomatic fiasco on a scale usually reserved for ideas brought forward (on this forum) by Orlong or Hooked. Pretty much everything in that area is claimed by two or more nations. So you would alienate pretty much everyone in the region by such a move.

[Thepersona]

the US being an ally with vietnam can only be seen as good. it maintains the statu quo, and in this case doing so prevents millions of deaths in stupid wars

[Gaexion Ramza Beoulve]

Our grandfathers fought like dogs, but I believe we can be friends.

Here, help yourself to some guns.

[Rust in Peace]

Little History lesson for you Americans; Ho Chi Minh hated China and he didn't like Russia much either, he took their help because he wanted Vietnam to be an independent country and was fully prepared to fight against either country if they had tried to invade once the war within Vietnam was over. He modeled the constitution for Vietnam after the US Declaration of Independence (which was modeled after the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789) using direct quotes from the former which still stand to this day. He repeatedly wrote to the US president at the time; Harry S. Truman in 1945, to support Vietnamese independence against the French colonial power at the time - to which Truman never answered. You also needed to remember that the reason the US intervened was because they were helping their French allies. Why would the US help a European country hold onto its colonial empire? Well post WW2 France was at high risk of being destabilized and there was a strong communist movement within France itself at the time. The US was worried that if Communists took power in France that the US would lose an ally in NATO in Europe. Also Vietnamese Communism, Chinese Communism and Russian Communism are very different. At the start of Ho Chi Minh's revolution they actually purged communists (Trotsky party members if I remember) in 1945. If you go even further back Vietnam and China have been at war with each other off and on for thousands of years.

[Deleted]

I am not seeing what you mean. We are not syria.

And hopefully you'll never be like syria.

[Xires]

No the main reason the US didn't "win" in Vietnam was anti-war fervor in the US and propaganda victories by North Vietnam like the Tet Offensive.

I say "win" in quotations because its not like we were "losing" either... Militarily the NVA was getting stomped and the VC was literally destroyed and no longer played a factor in the war...

The NVA was destroyed in tet and no longer played a factor in the war. The VC were the guerrilla's. It was the NVA that became ineffective.

[I Push Buttons]

[/B]


The NVA was destroyed in tet and no longer played a factor in the war. The VC were the guerrilla's. It was the NVA that became ineffective.

Perhaps you should read a history book. It was the exact opposite of that, the VC overextended and exhausted themselves in their striking of hundreds of different targets within South Vietnam during Tet. In the aftermath there was virtually nothing left and for the remainder of the war and the VC played a marginal role in NVA operations.

[Independent voter]

I am not seeing what you mean. We are not syria.

What Djalil is referring to is

1. Russia annexes Crimea and Russia intervenes in Ukraine.

2. The EU and US sanctions Russia as punishment

3. The Russian economy suffers

4. There's a rebellion in Syria

5. Putin has his close ally Assad, the president of Syria, terrorize Syrian Sunnis

6. Syrian Sunnis are driven from Syria like cattle, they go to Europe as refugees.

7. Europe is destabilized.

8. Putin, having his revenge on Europe, rubs his hands in glee.

[Orlong]

Little History lesson for you Americans; Ho Chi Minh hated China and he didn't like Russia much either, he took their help because he wanted Vietnam to be an independent country and was fully prepared to fight against either country if they had tried to invade once the war within Vietnam was over. He modeled the constitution for Vietnam after the US Declaration of Independence (which was modeled after the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789) using direct quotes from the former which still stand to this day. He repeatedly wrote to the US president at the time; Harry S. Truman in 1945, to support Vietnamese independence against the French colonial power at the time - to which Truman never answered. You also needed to remember that the reason the US intervened was because they were helping their French allies. Why would the US help a European country hold onto its colonial empire? Well post WW2 France was at high risk of being destabilized and there was a strong communist movement within France itself at the time. The US was worried that if Communists took power in France that the US would lose an ally in NATO in Europe. Also Vietnamese Communism, Chinese Communism and Russian Communism are very different. At the start of Ho Chi Minh's revolution they actually purged communists (Trotsky party members if I remember) in 1945. If you go even further back Vietnam and China have been at war with each other off and on for thousands of years.

He was also a communist dictator