this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
422 points (98.0% liked)

Political Memes

8596 readers
4822 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Rooki@lemmy.world
automodbeta@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
WrenFeathers@lemmy.world
422
Honestly (lemmy.world)
submitted 17 hours ago by Godric@lemmy.world to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] damdy@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago

I believe it was a transitional time for warfare. Muskets weren't much better than earlier technology, their strength was that you didn't need much training at all to use them as opposed to a bow or sword.

In earlier wars, if often came down to whoever broke and fled first, a smaller army fighting for beliefs rather than a Lord could beat a bigger army.

But they undervalued newer technology that could cause havoc by relatively untrained people. It wasn't the same as WW1 where this really showed, but it was definitely on the way.

[–] dhhyfddehhfyy4673@fedia.io 14 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Half men, heh.

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

100% dumbass

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 69 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

A coworker once told me that the South was doomed because the North had a larger industrial base. I said that sounded like wisdom in English, but it was a joke in Vietnamese.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

The north Vietnamese had China and the Soviet Union backing them. The US south had basically nobody.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 7 points 4 hours ago

https://richardpoe.substack.com/p/how-the-british-caused-the-american

Many people believe that the British government actively pushed the south to secede in order to weaken the US.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago

Not to mentioned the U.S. deployed something like 2.7 million people to Vietnam over the years. ~58,000 U.S. soilders died. Somewhere between 1-3 million people died in the war. Everyone lost that war. With deaths between 95%-98% not being U.S. troops though... It's hard to argue when someone says the U.S. didn't lose. We should have never been there, it was horrible.. but any proud boy I meet in a bar who knows the numbers is going to call that a win... Because they don't care about anything other than how many "bad people" died, and they consider anyone who looks/talks/acts different, bad people.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 17 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Apples and oranges.

Vietnamese had been fighting for twenty years against the French and Japanese. The South thought they would achieve victory with a few battles.

[–] AnalogNotDigital@lemmy.wtf 10 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

North Vietnam also had industrial bases in the Soviet Union AND China supplying and funding them. It's not like they were all paddy farmers.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org -3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

More importantly the US wasn't waging "war" against the "North". They were waging a genocidal destruction campaign against all Vietnamese, mainly in the US controlled South as a means to keep the region destabilized and prevent it from emerging as an economic competitor in the sphere of UDSSR/China.

So if you were Vietnamese in the North or South, Rice farmer or of another profession, chance was US being out to kill or subdue you, so resistance was the only option.

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

So weak, stupid, and with a rigid mindset?

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago

https://richardpoe.substack.com/p/how-the-british-caused-the-american

I've seen this idea from several sources. The British figured that American 'Manifest Destiny' would mean annexing Canada eventually. It didn't cost the Brits a lot to stir up Southern resentments against the North. So they South got played.

[–] Ioughttamow@fedia.io 22 points 16 hours ago

I suppose when that industrial output needs to cross an ocean. Not so much when it just needs to cross a river.