European Reacts: America Obliterates Half North Vietnam's Fleet in 13 Minutes



If you enjoyed the video, please subscribe, like, and turn on notifications. Thank you so much! ❤️

Socials:
📷Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/europeanreacts/
🫂Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/europeanreacts/
🔑Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/europeanreacts/

🌟Become a channel member and get a badge next to your name! Here:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgPh12KkTIsZuM8lXxjwkPA/join

Also:
👉🏻Original Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD2C1H-dzzI
👉🏻My Other Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@andrereacts7
👉🏻My Email: [email protected]

My name is André, and as a European (Portuguese), I always strive to bring a unique perspective to the topics I tackle. All my reaction videos are crafted with a playful and entertaining twist!At least I try… 🌍

European Reacts: America Obliterates Half North Vietnam’s Fleet in 13 Minutes
The Fat Electrician – European Reacts

source

49 thoughts on “European Reacts: America Obliterates Half North Vietnam's Fleet in 13 Minutes”

  1. Thanks to Political Hacks thousands of miles away in some cushy seat making up stupid rules America has NOT won a war since WW2. It makes you think they are just testing new equipment for proffit. NO POLITICAL HACK should be able to have stock in ANY war company

    Reply
  2. The USA didn't lose the Vietnam War on the battlefield. It lost it at home. The USA's citizens lost hope that it could be won. It was the first war that was lost because of unrestricted television coverage. The USA realized the mistake they'd made and never allowed reporters do whatever they wanted to on a battlefield again.
    On the ground, the USA won every major battle it fought and by the end of the war the Viet Cong didn't play a significant role anymore. North Vietnam ordered them to fight like normal soldiers during the "Tet Offensive". Because they weren't playing to their strengths, so many of them were killed there weren't enough left to have any real effect.
    The reason why politicians had such an effect on how the fighting was done was because they remembered how things went sour in North Korea after China moved in on the side of North Korea. The politicians made a lot of mistakes, but they were trying to keep Russia and China out of the war. And that effort worked.
    The F-4 Phantom II didn't have guns because it had been designed to intercept and attack Russian bombers at long range. The designers had never intended for it to get into dogfights.

    Reply
  3. Vietnam do to the war machine making money and the investors who invested in them, the politicians, and the generals who wanted to test equipment, strategies, training methods and the alphabet agencies wanting to run and test an the like. Well they didn't want the war to end. Then came Nixon wanting to end that forever war,and don't forget the news agencies also made money reporting on the war, and that's when Nixon got found out about spying on the democratic party. Funny how when he started putting an end to the war is when he gotten into trouble.

    Reply
  4. The Vietnam was is very controversial because it falls into the same category as the Iraq War where a lot of Americans now believe we shouldn't have gone to war there in the first place. It's now widely believed that, as with Iraq, the US government probably lied to the American people about their reason for going to war and a ton of both American and Vietnamese lives were lost as a consequence basically because our government was trying to control other countries. I am not a fan of the actions of the north Vietnamese government, but between the fact that the war was started based on a lie, the fact that we ended up committing a bunch of atrocities trying to win it, and the fact that even at that cost we still probably didn't actually improve the situation I think it's safe to say that a large portion of Americans today believe this was a war we should never have been involved in.

    I also suspect there was probably some reason for some of the rules Nick is describing. For example, rules about not engaging with enemy aircraft until you confirm that they are, in fact, enemy air craft is a big measure against friendly fire since militaries totally do routinely shoot their own people and equipment because they thought they were the enemy.

    The only good thing to come out of it was that America now NEVER underestimates an enemy simply because they're less technologically advanced, which gives us a tactical edge over most other countries. Most countries overestimate their own strength and expect their enemies to be easier to defeat in battle than they actually are. That's arguably what happened with Israel and Hamas, where the government of Israel knew that Hamas was planning an attack but just assumed they didn't have the technology to be able to pull it off. America assumes the enemy will be HARDER to defeat than we expect because one time we lost to a bunch of rural farmers while fighting against them with the world's largest and most advanced military.

    Reply
  5. One thing people often get wrong is the US politicians can lose or win wars however it is not wise to think that the us military or soldiers lost any of those. The military could leave none alive if that was the goal. After WW2 the USA rebuilt and protected eastern Europe. If you look back in history there are not many countries that just give back what they win in battle and not ask for compensation.

    Reply
  6. The Vietnam War is a "sensitive topic" with Americans because it pits the argument of "Military Conflict" vs "Political Conflict".

    Literally ever military encounter was won my American forces, ESPECIALLY the "large scale" battles (such as the Tet-Offensive)….. BUT due to political interference, any "gains" that the American military achieved were almost INSTANTLY tossed away by "political concerns". Which is why you ended up with CONSTANT battles over the same areas, locations … sending "patrols" out in the jungle that got ambushed because American forces were NOT ALLOWED to secure the "surrounding location" of where they were attached. (Meaning that they would secure a hill-top, but NOT the areas AROUND the hill-top, allowing the VC to constantly set up ambushes for the US patrols in the jungles LOOKING for where the VC might be coming from)

    In short, Vietnam taught America that when you get in a conflict… LET THE MILITARY FIGURE IT OUT…. but also taught US politicians that they could dictate HOW the Military is going to fight, and therefore the politicians will determine the when/where/how.

    And this is self-defeating because the ONLY REASON THE MILITARY IS USED is because THE POLITICIANS ALREADY FAILED! If the politicians had DONE THEIR JOB, then "military conflict" would have been AVOIDED TO BEGIN WITH!

    Reply
  7. 1985: 73% of the American public opposed Vietnam wore
    1995: 72% of the American public opposed Vietnam wore
    2015: 51% of the American public opposed Vietnam wore

    You would never know that the US public has always overwhelmingly opposed the Vietnam wore by watching FE's video. He attempts to divert from this fact by blaming politicians for not fighting the wore more ruthlessly. This is grotesque. Over 2 million Vietnamese died. Many are still developing cancer as a result of the enormous amount of chemical weapons we dumped all over their country.

    Andre, if you want to truly understand US history you need to consult actual historians, not a YT personality with a political bias.

    It's sad that you skip over all comments that present reasoned criticism and factual data in favor of comments that confirm your biases and beliefs.

    Data source: CBS News Poll: U.S. involvement in Vietnam, January 28, 2018

    Reply
  8. While I was there on an Air Force base , on the outside of the base there was a road connecting both sides of the base , and next to the road was a monestary , the V.C. would sit in the windows and shoot at our vehicles as we passed , but we were NOT ALLOWED to shoot back because "it was a monestary " ! How absurd is that ? Politians interfered with the military constantly !!!!

    Reply
  9. Cool! Just in case you missed the comment on your cheese video. I highly recommend that you check out his, "America's secret underground cheese bunkers,' video. (To be honest, TFE channel was a good find, to understand some of underlying American culture, that even many Americans don't understand) (ALSO, He is super cool with reaction channels)

    Reply
  10. A lot of the controversy, has to do with, the politicians lied to the public, to manufacturer consent…. because, even with the lies, a lot of the public, wanted nothing to do with it. Then, college student protesters were shot by the national guard. It's a lesson that people forget about government.

    Reply
  11. The Vietnam war was never a declared war. It was deemed a police action. That's why the politicians had so much say in what the military could or could not do. It was a very insane situation & an illegal war. That was one of the main reasons there was so much opposition to the war.

    Reply
  12. To me the vietnam war is similar to the russia Ukraine war The Russians went in as a supieor force but couldn't cope with the unconventional tactics of their opponent. As was the case for the Vietnam war for the most part.

    Reply
  13. His descriptions of what happened is extremely simplified and not at all the whole story. The whole story is almost as stupid, frankly, but it's way more complex than the scope of this video could really describe

    Reply
  14. I would’ve paid a lot more attention in school if this high energy powered X military guy taught my history class. Yeah the language but you gotta remember he’s military and a man. The cussing doesn’t bother me. Matter fact, cussing while injured helps you control your pain been proven.

    Reply
  15. Vietnam was really a war of politicians trying to micromanage everything and fucking it all up.

    People with no military knowledge are shit at controlling the military, who knew?

    Give the military objectives, and let the tacticians and strategists do their job

    Reply
  16. I think Black Man and Robin is friggin hilarious and I wouldn't be even a little offended by that. Come on–bruh is Batman in this equation. He's the one got the prestige here LOL. 🙌🏼😆

    Reply
  17. The American military didn't actually lose any aspects of that war. The Politicians dragged it along and then undid EVERY victory!!! That War was won multiple times militarily. That war should've been OVER within 2 to 2.5 years at most!
    Keep in mind that the denial of materials thing has WORKED OVER AND OVER AGAIN!!! Works today!
    It's not just the Politicians….The average citizen wanted to jump at any chance to "Give Peace A Chance.". 🤦🏿‍♂

    Reply
  18. Yeah, this was a dumb war/police action. The reasoning behind drafting kids for this was not for our country’s defense. American citizens are all for doing their part, but not for throwing lives at ideology. In fact, many of our wealthy of draft age got out of going. If this was a righteous action, this would not have been the case. Vietnam veterans were treated poorly when they came home, by both our government and their neighbors. Worse, rural villages were massacred without provocation. AWEFUL.

    Reply
  19. When watching Fat Electrician always watch to the end! In this video he actually has part of a interview with the guy leading the third flight where he complains that being told to find his own migs is a bit rude! 😛

    Reply
  20. As far as the F-4 not having a gun… there were a lot of theories about how air warfare would go. The F-4 really was going along the "We need an interceptor to keep Russian nuclear bombers away from our carriers," which meant… yes, missiles. The missiles themselves were poorly tested – they failed frequently because while they worked fine in a lab, and ideally would be taken off an aircraft, etc. – they weren't. (Not really the maintainers' fault, they had a war to fight.) The electronics would jostle around, some of the missile ejection systems to get it away from the aircraft didn't work, and the hot and humid environment of Vietnam didn't do the electronics any favors – on top of it all being fairly new tech. (The F-4 did get a gun later -earlier models often had them added on as gun pods, which weren't quite as good but were something.)
    At least we didn't go as far as the UK, with their infamous "white paper" which basically said "We don't need interceptors, we have missiles!" and absolutely gutted their defense industry. The English Electric Lightning only survived and got into service at the time because it was too far along to be canceled.

    Reply

Leave a Comment