[wredcoll]

The Vietnam war, or at least the fighting that us Americans refer to by that name, was started by the sovereign state of North Vietnam invading the sovereign state of South Vietnam and ended when America (and allies) stopped defending the state of South Vietnam and North Vietnam conquered it.

You can make all sorts of arguments as to whether or not it was moral to partition the original state of Vietnam into two separate states or whether it was moral for America to be involved at any point, but I'd make the general argument that the state starting a war with a literal invasion is rarely the moral party in such situations.

[alephknoll]

Thats some deranged historical revisionism.

The vietnamese won their war of independence against france ( aka first indochina war). Then the US stepped in to protect 'european colonial interests' gave the southern half of vietnam to france with the promise that the vietnamese people will have a vote. When polls showed southern vietnamese were overwhelming for reunification with the north, we renegged on our promise and did not allow a vote. And hence the 2nd indochina war happened.

> The Vietnam war, or at least the fighting that us Americans refer to by that name, was started by the sovereign state of North Vietnam invading the sovereign state of South Vietnam

The vietnam war was the US fighting the Viet Cong. Do you know who the viet cong was? They were SOUTH vietnamese. The vietnam war wasn't the US fighting north vietnam. It was the US fighting south vietnamese freedom fighters.

[reducesuffering]

The Vietnam War was definitely involving the North Vietnamese military, PAVN, what? Just because the Viet Cong in the South was involved doesn't mean the North Vietnamese were twiddling their thumbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tet_Offensive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Offensive

[wredcoll]

> When polls showed southern vietnamese were overwhelming for reunification with the north, we renegged on our promise and did not allow a vote. And hence the 2nd indochina war happened.

Which is why the south fielded close to a million man army and the north had to murder several hundred thousand south Vietnamese when they won the war? They just wanted to reunify peacefully so badly?

[alephknoll]

> Which is why the south fielded close to a million man army

What does this have to do with the fact that most south vietnamese wanted reunification? You mean governments are able to pay poor men to sign up for wars? Shocking.

So we are agreed that the south vietnamese wanted to vote for reunification and the US renegged on that vote. Nothing else matters. That's the crux of the problem.

> and the north had to murder several hundred thousand south Vietnamese when they won the war?

But most of the south vietnamese military supported the north. Especially towards the end of the war. If your assertion was true, then how evil must the US truly be to allow hundred of thousands of soldiers to be murdered? Oh wait, you are just making shit up. And if the north was murdering hundreds of thousands of south vietnamese soldiers, there would have been an uprising. Oh wait, there was no uprising. Stop making things up.

> They just wanted to reunify peacefully so badly?

Yes. It's why the vietnamese agreed to the partition. They foolishly expected that the US ( the self-proclaimed defender of democracy and freedom ) was negotiating in good faith. Hopefully the vietnamese learned their lesson.

You are outright lying about basic historical facts. Not sure why you expected to get away with it. Especially here.

[throwaway99974]

>You mean governments are able to pay poor men to sign up for wars?

The Viet Cong were able to pay those poor men too, but the vast majority of them chose to fight for and to be paid by the south.

>If your assertion was true, then how evil must the US truly be to allow hundred of thousands of soldiers to be murdered?

They were evil enough to allow tens to hundreds of thousands of south Vietnamese to be subject to torture and starvation in concentration camps.

[spaced-out]

>The Viet Cong were able to pay those poor men too, but the vast majority of them chose to fight for and to be paid by the south.

If this is true why couldn't the South beat the North, or at least defend itself on its own? After the US left the South Vietnamese folded pretty quickly.

[wredcoll]

> So we are agreed that the south vietnamese wanted to vote for reunification and the US renegged on that vote. Nothing else matters. That's the crux of the problem

Just to be clear, my argument is that launching an invasion of the south was an immoral act.

It doesn't necessarily justify any immoral actions by america (or anyone else) but vice versa it's extremely hard to justify launching an invasion.

[throwaway99974]

>It was the US fighting south vietnamese freedom fighters.

Hilarious how now we are calling revolutionaries who fought to merge their country with a totalitarian dictatorship "freedom" fighters.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.