Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (46174)	5/3/2001 10:16:29 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 70976

"It was both civil war and an example of communist aggression. It wasn't only the Viet Cong in the south you also had NVA (not to mention that some of the Viet Cong were from the north). And the final fall of the south was to a conventional attack. Yes and no. They are all one nation but there were two states. Country had been artificially divided after the French were kicked out. US was worried about falling dominoes. There is a school of thought that believes that although we lost the war, we did achieve our objective of both limiting the threat of communist expansion and of Chinese imperialism outside of Vietnam. We bought Asia--cambodia, laos, thailand, burma, malaya, singapore, phillipines et al. some time. I kind of take some solace in that. But it cost 60,000 American lives and hundreds of thousands Vietnamese too. It also divided this country politically 2nd only to the civil war. What a price to pay.