Is Vietnam the absolutely most insane conflict wages in modern times?
>sending in 6 man teams miles behind enemy lines
>booby traps fucking everywhere
>make spooky recordings to scare goons
>fucking CIA had its own airline to run bombing campaigns
I’m on vacation in the area and being in the environment has just really helped the insanity of the conflict set in.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
articles.latimes.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Define modern times, because imo WW1 was the worst. Trenches and gas, no thanks. Id rather worry about ambushes and spike pits, than knowing i was getting trench foot and gassed.
>>CIA had its own airline to run bombing missions
>bombing missions
Right
iran iraq war.
>landing craft assaults
>electrified marshes
>child soldiers
>mbt's
>chemical weapons
>artillery duels
>chemical artillery duels
>trenches
>petangon/kremlin desk-flown jet combat
shit was neato
It lacks a lot of the behind the scenes manipulation that Vietnam had IMO. Vietnam was pretty much started off of a 100% made up incident just to give us validation to increase our presence.
Helicopter Dog fights too
Shit was cutthroat. When I think war, I think of close quarter firefights in the jungle with macguyver traps everywhere, niggas hiding in spiderholes waiting to ambush, blood and people's intestines all over the place with lots of rape and kid killing.
From the average soldiers level I’d say eastern front WW2 was the worst just because of the hatred both sides had for each other meant capture wasn’t an option.
However as far as special forces goes I don’t think anything has been as intense as MACV-SOG
You save some gook bitch and her gooklets and she offers you water but nades you instead. vietnam was brutal
Yes.
How would electrifying marshes work? The electricity would go straight to the ground
oh yeah? go put a live wire in a marsh and go for a swim retard. Make sure to stream it.
Tigers, snakes, evil centipedes and other jungle nasties to fuck you up
Fuck fighting in a jungle
idk, WW1 was also almost entirely unneccessary in retrospect and came about due to the posturing of old european aristocracy.
Like Britain would probably straight up not have been involved if the Kaiser didn't have such a hardon for having a big dick fleet, not to mention France basically only being involved for revenge and clay purposes post 1870. It was entirely avoidable had Wilhelm just let go of his inferiority complex w.r.t having colonies and holding on to Alsace.
Compared to literally millions dying because of a few guys and their fucked up psychological issues, US leadership getting overzealous and misguided w.r.t the spread of communism seems small fry.
>WW1 was also almost entirely unneccessary in retrospect and came about due to the posturing of old european aristocracy.
Being so mad that someone wants to do something their way (communism) that you stage an incident making you look like the victim to give justification for your further intervention.
USA in Vietnam were literally acting like SJWs do today
Where is that from? Would love to read something about that war that's not Wikipedia
WW2 had a number of much, much. MUCH deadlier operations than anything WW1 had. Chemical weapons are overmemed - they fell out of use mostly due to permanently being plainly far less effective than conventionals.
You're thinking COIN, not war.
>hatred both sides had for each other meant capture wasn’t an option.
The number of POW taken by both sides counted in millions. Nazis simply preferred to get rid of their POWs ASAP to ease the logistic strains.
>USA in Vietnam were literally acting like SJWs do today
No. They were protecting the prospects of their imperialistic capital (embodied in local markets) from risk of other imperialistic capital (USSR) making pushing them out of those markets. The reasoning behind the most of Cold War proxy conflicts is "who gets exclusive trade rights with this colonial shithole?"
WW1 was literally the same in that regard. WW2 was Germany attempting an alternate solution ("why fight for colonies when you can make your literal neighbors into your colonies?").
>making a move to pushing them out of those markets
selffix
it was all just a revenue generating tool for the Military Industrial Complex
also for testing ground for weapons, and conflict strategies
>Be Marines in Hue '68
>Dinks holed up in countless fortified concrete commie block type buildings
>Clearing them all is a nightmare
>Until the M-50 roles in
>So effective that just hitting the side of a building with one of it's .50 cal spotter rounds causes the enemy to panic and flee
Yeah, that war was certifiably insane, especially when you realize that fully half the soldiers were smoking pot, ten percent were shooting heroin, similar numbers would drop acid, and they would get beer air delivered to FOBs.
forgot pic
Sounds like made up bullshit that theauthor swallowed to make a good story.
>helicopter dog fights
I can only imagine what a clusterfuck this would look like based on conflict video from Syria and Yemen today.
>testing ground for weapons, and conflict strategies
US military leadership and their contractors knew fully well that any military intervention in Vietnam will be nothing alike the possible conflict with USSR and the Warsaw Pact - weapons and tactics used there would be useless against Soviet war machine, so that point is moot. It's experience has proven valuable for COIN, but back then nobody could even guess that USSR will just happen to roll over and die, making XXI century a COINapalooza.
>revenue generating tool for the Military Industrial Complex
No economic power in the world is capable of fully engineering an entire military conflict - world is not running under planned economy, and market is too unpredictable to just prepare and build something like that without other players and government oversight dismantling your efforts. MIC just quietly and rather aimlessly lobbies political decisions that may prove to slightly rise tensions, and sometimes that's enough for the government to perceive a Short Victorious War in some bumfuck region to be a worthwhile solution.
Is vietnam worth visiting?
I remember hearing a story about a us company being cut off and encircled by vietcongs with modern (for the time ak's) and black berets
By the time reinforcements came they found their bodies with cut ears, castrated , gouged out eyes allot of them shot point blank in the head
you guys heard of that?
I pretty well agree with this. You could argue that it was useful for testing the effectiveness of strategic bombing and aircraft against air defense, but pretty well nothing on the ground resembled the anticipated conflict of the Soviet armor entering the Fulda gap.
Pretty certain that's a meme. VC was never capable of concentrating enough forces to encircle an entire company (which takes a full regiment with support), and I don't remember an entire company being lost like that in any operation. People's Army of Vietnam is another issue, but still - they never performed something like that to US forces even during the Eastern Offensive. Now, did anything like that happen to ARVN forces? Most probably, and lots of Americans literally forget that most of the actual war was fought between PAVN and ARVN, so they eventually replace ARVN forces with American ones in such stories.
Sounds fake
>mfw Americans consider what is essentially rear FOBbit duty in another conflict to be their most insane war.
That's just sad. You had Civil War and WWII Western Front + Africa + Pacific theater, which all piss and shit on Vietnam conflict in about every metric.
Forgot the picture
>C&C/10
Honestly, if we are talking about modern wars as meaning post WWII or at least post WWI I would say that the Pacific campaign and the Korean War were far more brutal. We lost as many men in Korea as we did in Vietnam, but that was over a three year period vs. longer than a decade. Korea also had an incredibly brutal environment to fight in, extreme cold and mountains.
The M-50 had six 105mm (marked as 106mm to avoid munitions confusion) recoilless rockets which would launch in tandem or in salvo depending on the target. In the early 60's they were experimenting with a revolver loading system which would have given each tube 4 rockets a piece to fire in quick succession. It's only draw back was that the crew had to leave the vehicle to reload each tube and ammunition had to be stored externally, but it was still a beast of a machine for fire support. In Vietnam they were mostly used for base and bridge defense owing to the lack of VC armor and it's weakness to mines, but during Hue it was used for bunker busting to great effect.
What I mean is from my hs physics I learned electricity takes the path of least resistance to the ground. If you laid exposed cables onto the floor it would all just go to the ground.
It is fake. Human bodies stacked on a fucking marsh cannot support a truck.
not really since those spooky teams generally got mauled and were regularly wiped out by peasant patrols
Guaranteed. They're describing a war crime, and the Amerifats would have dug it up and made sure it made it into the news when they were trying to keep the public happy with Gulf War 2 electric boogaloo
>but it was still a beast of a machine
Such a beast that less than 3 hundred were made, a little more than a hundred were deployed, all their units were deactivated before war was even over.
Oh, and I forgot to mention that the entire concept was never remembered ever again.
Bog sludge is somewhat of an insulator - it's mostly compressed cellulose. The incidents of electrified water fences are true, but they were largely extremely ineffective aside from psyops.
>being this gullible
Child soldiers are the best to shoot in the legs they should suffer for killing our guys.
Iran Iraq is up there, bunch of tusken raiders re enact ww1 with modern weapons
>you will never be a spook shooting down gook biplanes with captured AKs while flying Air America ferry flights
Why even live?
>6 tubes rapidly deploying missiles at you from relatively nearby
It didnt fit in with typical doctrine for the us and the concept was a little bulky.
Still sounds like a scary fucking thing to see and hear.
>not really since those spooky teams generally got mauled and were regularly wiped out by peasant patrols
They routinely achieved a 10:1 KD ratio and would be out numbered 20:1 often times. These dudes were easily some of the most efficient soldiers the US has ever produced
Never has a single group in US military history had a 10:1 k/d
>No economic power in the world is capable of fully engineering an entire military conflict
the last 75 years of US foreign intervention would like a word with you
Dac Cong did some wild shit, wouldn't surprise me if that was them.
The thoughts of the spiders and centipedes makes me weak. I could handle seeing or dealing with a python or viper, but fuck a giant insect or arachnid.
The most insane part of world war one was the insane mindset behind them.
A creeping barrage was considered successful if it killed less than 15% of the friendly forces marching behind it.
>Britain would probably straight up not have been involved if the Kaiser didn't have such a hardon for having a big dick fleet
You mean if Britain didn't autismally decide they're the only ones in Europe allowed to have a navy.
Speaking of centipedes. I bought this in a local market in Laos. Imagine not only worrying about Charlie killing you but these niggers eating you.
Insane might be a nebulous term with more than one definition here. In terms of crazy shit happening I don't think the scale of the conflict is so important.
Oh, please. This is the same Iraq that gassed its own people, yet to this day a majority of Americans still think Saddam never had any WMDs.
They'd have to sedate me in order to sleep in the jungle. I know damned well you could hear those bastards moving they're so big. Because where I live some of the spiders can get big enough to the point where you can hear them walking (not tarantulas either).
I thought shit like that died out after the Carboniferous Era. Yeesh.
Idk, but Americans in WWII were boiling Japs' heads and sending them back to their wives. You don't hear people from Vietnam doing that shit.
Japs believed that their Emperor was a god. Basically a cult army that would do mass suicide missions on a whim. Pretty unheard of for the modern era.
No one disputes that he had chemical weapons and used them. The west fucking gave him that old shit. What we don't believe are all the claims that he had anthrax/other modern weapons programs going that were our impetus for invading in 2003.
The crew of the Enola Gay would like to have a word with you...
Liar, the first engagements of the Vietnam war were so heavily American-sided it convinced the American leadership they could win from attrition alone.
US marines had something close to 10:1.
Battle of Mogadishu (1993)
Nigga what?
Midway, too.
None of those are Vietnam.
see >in US military history
Yes, their sister company got hung up in the jungle under fore as night fell and heard it all go down from a few hundred yards away in their holes. The next day when they were able to extricate themselves they found over forty men shot pointblank in the head and almost no enemy dead.
The company comander of the sister company describes it in the Ken Burns. Was in 66 or 67, pointless hill battle.
>used the corpses to make roads
nah son
>It didnt fit in with typical doctrine for the us and the concept was a little bulky.
It was pretty shit.
>Still sounds like a scary fucking thing to see and hear.
Literally "an AT squad with M40s riding an M113, but them M40s don't fit inside so we'll strap them out there".
>They routinely achieved a 10:1 KD ratio and would be out numbered 20:1 often times
So this is the power of Ultra Memery. Motherfucker they virtually NEVER confirmed kills.
>Basically a cult army that would do mass suicide missions on a whim
Kinda wrong on multiple levels.
>The company comander of the sister company describes
Company commanders describe a great lot of bullshit.
okay. suck my balls.
Sombody tell Dan Carlin to make a six hour HH podcast on this.
ayo fuck that shit
>When Arabs thought "you can't fight a modern war with WW1-era tactics" was a challenge, not a statement.
>petangon/kremlin desk-flown jet combat
que?
>Entirely unnecessary
Seriously. Ferdinand gets assassinated (ironic) and war declared on the Bosnian shitters who refused to turn over the assassin(s). Thanks to all these dumb ass treaties every country enters the water. Thus World War 1.
Please shut up. You are approaching "too dumb to breathe" territory.
Not an argument.
You two are beyond argumentation - argumentation requires a common field, a ground to build mutual understanding from. You live in your own world, separated entirely from reality.
Still waiting for that argument.
>articles.latimes.com
found the source
Vietnam is so overrated and overhyped. It was a brutal war, yeah. Same as Korea but in a different way.
The NVA and VC were fucked up in basically every encounter. The US ass-ravaged them. It was pure politics that limited what the US could do.
Sadly, that was one lesson we never learned. A politically limited war full of symbolic strikes is never as effective as a massive force with a clearly defined objective and the ability to fuck the enemy's shit up until the objective is achieved.
My parents lived through that shit and they still hate Iran for it. That shit killed their friends. It made my dad join the Iraq military only for him to lose his job in 2003.
>lots of Americans literally forget that most of the actual war was fought between PAVN and ARVN
They also tend to forget that Australia and South Korea did a good amount of heavy lifting too. Hell, even our normies here forget it, even though our national anthem is literally about vietnam war returning servicemen
Whose national anthem?
aussie
youtube.com
Please stand for the Australian national anthem
>You had Civil War and WWII Western Front + Africa + Pacific theater, which all piss and shit on Vietnam conflict in about every metric.
Out of all those,. only the Civil War and the Pacific theatre were worse. On a per-combatant basis the Pacific wasn't as bad as Vietnam.
>MIC just quietly and rather aimlessly lobbies political decisions that may prove to slightly rise tensions, and sometimes that's enough for the government to perceive a Short Victorious War in some bumfuck region to be a worthwhile solution.
>implying national strategists take the MIC reps seriously
Where are they getting the number for the civil war? Not including confederate deaths?
Fuck forgot pic.
Read Robert Fisk's "War for Civilisation", in particular the chapter called "The Whirlwind War".
>During its time in Vietnam the SASR proved highly successful, with members of the regiment known to theViet CongasMa Rungor "phantoms of the jungle" due to their stealth.[47]In a six-year period the Australian and New Zealand SAS in Vietnam conducted nearly 1,200 patrols[48]and inflicted heavy casualties on the Viet Cong, including 492 killed, 106 possibly killed, 47 wounded, 10 possibly wounded and 11 prisoners captured. Their own losses totalled one killed in action, one died of wounds, three accidentally killed, one missing and one death from illness. Twenty-eight men were wounded. During the period of its deployment 580 men served in the SASR in Vietnam.[49]
>ywn slaughter gooks with a 250:1 kill ratio with your sawn of SLR and nig rigged grenade launcher.
I was just a Cu Chi, and I can tell you those Vietnamese tunnels are spooky as shit. Nearly had a panic attack going through the 50m one that dropped to 2.5 feet in diameter.
Yes
>t. Guy who is here for 38 more hours
It's both.
140k union and 70k csa from battle.
They cite some va factsheet.
how does 580:492 reduce to 250:1?
492 kills and 2 deaths?
Round 246 to 250?