No. This conversation is now officially boring. Agree to disagree, or just think you are right and I am wrong. Other more entertaining threads are now afoot and I don't want to rehash another tiring topic that occures 3 times a year every year at every university, and every year in politics. I made my points, you made your points, anything further and we will be going in circles. At this point I think people are too combative and not listening well enough at this point. More importantly, I don't give a fuck anymore and all that argumentative energy I had earlier is gone, spent on other things.
The funny thing is that I didn't know until yesterday that there are really people who consider the Vietnam War (which is the common name for that war/conflict/bullshit) a conflict and no war. I can asure you that these discussions you mentioned don't exist in countries outside the US, at least I can't imagine they exist (I'm no philosopher nor politician, so I never sat in a class with people who would discuss such a thing).
IMHO everyone who even thinks that a "conflict" that includes sending thousands of soldiers into a foreign country on another continent to kill more than 1mio(!) people is no real war must be mentally disabled or completely stupid (sorry if I offended some people here now, but I can't find any other words for that).
What would be even worse is someone thinking that anything including killing 1mio+ people can be considered a "win" in any way by saying "if they didn't retreat they would've actually won this war"..
You don't have to answer this post if it there are better threads to answer to, I just wanted to explain my point.
