DarkWolf wrote:The Lizard King wrote:Groovypiltogg wrote:who says that honestly
Apparently, King, and those hippie idiots who are still too stoned to realize the '70's are over (not to get political, but we could've won 'Nam if it wasn't for those damned hippies. If I had more long hair pieces, I would have a Brikwars battle to blow them thirty-five ways to hell.)
I'll tell you who says "Groovy," you numbskulls! Duke Nukem and Ash from Evil Dead, two of the BrikWarsiest heroes of all time.
I like this idea of "winning" 'Nam. What would that have even meant? Maybe if we killed enough civilians we could have gotten them to say that the Gulf of Tonkin attack actually happened, or that they were very sorry and they'd stop trying to have human rights or choose their own form of government.
What we should have done is made up some kind of complete fiction about weapons of mass destruction. Because that works awesome.
The fact is, we did "win" Nam. Our objective was to enter into a state of warfare with no win objective in order to boost the economy and make a whole lot of money for the military industry. And as far as that went, we did just fine.