3 ms·

The media (and the author of this book) love to portray America as "stumbling" into yet another conflict. Here's a great thread with numerous examples of this:

The media (and the author of this book) love to portray America as "stumbling" into yet another conflict. Here's a great thread with numerous examples of this: https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/878006629802713089 https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/878006629802713089 Oops, we accidentally were forced into invading another country and building another permanent military base. The "enemy" leave us no choice! The purpose of these wars is not to "win" in the traditional sense, but rather to ensure US business interests are being protected around the world. And by that metric, Vietnam, the "Cold War", both Iraq wars, etc. have been successful.

alphabettsy 9y ago
The purpose you may see is not to “win” in the traditional sense, but American Presidents including Trump talking about winning wars and defeating the enemy. Most people know these conflicts are about business interests and resources, but they portray them to the public as a battle to protect our freedom and security at home. Many of our politicians act like America is simply the victim protecting itself from people that are setting out to attack us. They don’t mention the American businesses that our military basically acts like a security force for.
noobhacker 9y ago
Could you elaborate on how the Vietnam War succeeded in "protecting US business interests around the world"? In my view, first, the Vietnam War has little to do with "business interest," more with containing the spread of communism. Second, the Vietnam War did not succeed in containing communism. After the US's withdrawal, North Vietnam took the entire country, and North Vietnam allies came to power in Laos and Cambodia. So I'd count the Vietnam War as a big loss in terms of containing communism, and a neutral in terms of protecting US business interest.
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  > Second, the Vietnam War did not succeed in containing communism Sure it did, or at least it helped. As with many conflicts of that era, North and South Vietnam were proxies for the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. Note that the U.S.S.R. no longer exists. It's been completely eliminated from the face of the earth. That counts as winning, by most standards. Vietnam started the process of bleeding them dry, and Afghanistan finished it.

alphabettsy 9y ago

The purpose you may see is not to “win” in the traditional sense, but American Presidents including Trump talking about winning wars and defeating the enemy. Most people know these conflicts are about business interests and resources, but they portray them to the public as a battle to protect our freedom and security at home. Many of our politicians act like America is simply the victim protecting itself from people that are setting out to attack us. They don’t mention the American businesses that our military basically acts like a security force for.

noobhacker 9y ago

Could you elaborate on how the Vietnam War succeeded in "protecting US business interests around the world"? In my view, first, the Vietnam War has little to do with "business interest," more with containing the spread of communism. Second, the Vietnam War did not succeed in containing communism. After the US's withdrawal, North Vietnam took the entire country, and North Vietnam allies came to power in Laos and Cambodia. So I'd count the Vietnam War as a big loss in terms of containing communism, and a neutral in terms of protecting US business interest.

Turing_Machine 9y ago
> Second, the Vietnam War did not succeed in containing communism Sure it did, or at least it helped. As with many conflicts of that era, North and South Vietnam were proxies for the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. Note that the U.S.S.R. no longer exists. It's been completely eliminated from the face of the earth. That counts as winning, by most standards. Vietnam started the process of bleeding them dry, and Afghanistan finished it.