Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
Strategic attacks aimed to weaken Vietnam's military=making the Vietnamese easier to kill/sending the message that supporting the Viet Cong is worthy of death
|
^ That's prob true, but isn't this equation true too:-
Strategic attacks to weaken N Vietnam's military=reducing their ability to attack S Vietnamese and US soldiers
Quote:
|
Would the attacks be meaningful if they had no casualties?
|
I would've thought so, yes. The main object of destroying a bridge is to reduce troop movements, for example.
As I say, sadly, that's true.
Quote:
Bonus question: would John McCain have complied with the draft if the public opinion was that it inherently made him a war criminal?
Hint: the answer is yes. That's why Johnny boy is worth decrying.
|
^ Not sure what this question is about. Are you suggesting that any US soldier serving in Vietnam was ipso facto a war criminal?