• Yes. Canada was “invaded” only one time. Its neighbours to the south - the USA hold that place in history. The War of 1812 was a pre-emptive strike by the USA that ended with Canadians burning down what is now the White House. After 188 days, the Americans retreated from Canadian lands, what we now call Canada and the British were once again in control.The United States failed in EVERY attempt to capture Canada!
  • Vietnam is considered an American loss, although technically we just withdrew our troops.
  • The question asked is a matter of semantics. No is the answer. However, if you ask, has America ever been beaten? The answer is yes. Viet Nam & Somalia are the two best examples. Both of these Police Actions were thwarted by Militia's. These were the product of our Troops being used in illegal/immoral United Nation's operations, just as they are in Iraq.
  • NO, only having withdrawn from particular conflicts. If there was any thought that we "lost" the war in Vietnam that is silly. Also, looking in hindsight, the accomplishment of stopping Communism in the region was actually accomplished since the Spread of communism stopped at Vietnam. The Russians, if nothing else, realized that it would be quite costly to spread their doctrine if the US was going to engage it everywhere it reared it's ugly head. Somalia was not a war, merely a president in Clinton who had no balls and would not take care of the situation, as that was his normal foreign policy way anyway. Do nothing and hope it goes away. He would have beenperfect for the UN presidency.
  • Technically, no. The US has never surrendered to an enemy nation. After that, it's a matter of semantics. In Vietnam, the US Military not only won the war, but won it three times. The leftist Press in the US kept encouraging the North Vietnamese, re-kindling their broken will to fight. That same Press also succeeded in breaking the American will to fight (the majority, anyway) after the Tet Offensive (in which the US kicked butt -- it was the desperate last gasp by the VC, and they utterly failed militarily, and were ready to surrender at that point, but then tuned in to Walter Cronkite and decided to hold on.) Nixon's policy was to bomb the North into giving up on the military conquest of the South. They eventually capitulated. The US pledged to renew the bombing if and when the North ever renewed its attacks against the South. After Watergate, the Democrats controlling congress were salivating at the chance to deal another humiliation to the Republicans; North Vietnam realizing this, launched its final invasion of the South. The Democratic Congrees refused to give Ford the funds to honor our commitments (i.e., to bomb the hell of Hanoi), thereby betraying our allies in South Vietnam, not to mention Cambodia and Laos, and made the US a global laughing stock for the next 6 years, encouraging such things as the Iranian revolution and the "Hostage Crisis". As for the US invasion of Canada: 1) Canada was British at the time: we did attempt an invasion with the idea of taking it from the British, but we failed miserably. But the principle war aim was the end to impressment of US sailors - which had been stopped a few days before the Congress declared war. (The problems of communication across oceans in the days of sail.) The war of 1812 was technically a draw.
  • We are currently loosing the war on drugs, if that counts.
  • Yes American Civil War US vs US US won US lost but definitely a loss as it killed more American men in uniform than most of the other wars that the US has engaged in since.
  • Of course, the answer to your question will vary depending upon the nationality of the answerer. although it has been very educational to discover from other answers that Vietnam was an American victory. Somewhere on Answerbag the opposite question was asked. You might be interested in the answers that question received.
  • The U.S. lost the Seminole Wars I, II and III. The War of 1812 (1812 - 1815) was not a glorious passage in American arms due in part to the amateurish performance of American militia. After their decisive victory at the Battle of York the Americans gratuitously looted the city (now Toronto, Canada) and burnt down the Parliament Buildings of Upper Canada, an act considered unusually vicious and unnecessary. This led directly to the greatest military disaster ever sustained by the United States -- the retaliatory sacking of Washington City, including the firing of the Capitol Building, the destruction of the Navy Yard and, most humiliating, the burning of the White House itself. The American statement of cause for the war was Britain's policy of impressment and search on the high seas and her interference with American shipping in general. Britain had also materially supported Indian resistance to American incursions into the West beyond the Ohio River as far as the Columbia. That the US had intervened in the larger European war on the side of the Napoleonic dictatorship; that the desire of the "War Hawks" for territorial expansion at the expense of British Canada and Spanish Florida might have been a fundimental reason for the conflict; or that British impressment of American seamen had been surrendered in practice if not in principle well before 1812 are facts that to this day don't get wide play in the history books distributed to American schools. Eventually, the British held parts of Maine and some outposts in the sparsely populated West while the Americans held Canadian territory near Detroit, but all occupied territories were restored at the end of the war. Although the Duke of Wellington stated that the War of 1812 ended in a military stalemate, both Canada and the US claim victory. So, go figure. If one considers the Civil War about the right of each state to determine its own laws, then the American Constitution lost in that one. Extrapolating, if we are a nation of laws and not men, and the Constitution is the foundation of our laws, then the U.S. lost the Civil War. Korea ended in compromise, with only the southern half controlled and eventually given self-determination under western auspices independent of global communist influences. ...and then there was Vietnam: As for the Vietnam War, of the stated American military and political objectives of the time -- a devolution affected by frequent mission creep due to continuous failure in both arenas from the 1954 French defeat at Dien Bien Phu until the ignominious end in 1975 depicted by the clamoring hordes swamping the American embassy in a chaotic Saigon (a city suddenly flooded with enemy NVA and Viet Cong irregulars) in terror to reach the few helicopters available for their rescue -- not one objective was met. A panicky retreat with international newsreels showing our Navy men pushing helos off the decks of American aircraft carriers into the the South China Sea to make room for more, is not the act of victors. As to the still common assertion that the Vietnamese were indescriminately carpet bombed into submission, their signing of the peace treaty in Paris resulted in the cessation of the bombing and US armed forces evacuating their country; although it was meant to be done in more subdued gradations, the way it happened only emphasizes how the US lost control of the situation. Nixon’s policy of declaring victory and abandoning the field was not victory. It was defeat. The 1975 withdrawl of US troops from Vietnam resulted directly in the rapid spread of communism in the region. The Khmer Rouge takeover of Cambodia, renamed Kampuchea under the brutal communist leader Pol Pot, led to four years of unchecked genocide between 1975 and 1979. The Pathet Lao did the same in Laos after 1975. Southern Thailand was under constant threat and in turmoil due to both the Khmer Rouge and Pathet Lao. Burma (today's Myanmar) is a communist dictatorship and today threatens the northern border of Thailand. The permanent disolution of SEATO was the direct result of US troops pulling out of Vietnam, leaving the government under Ho Chi Minh via Viet Cong guerillas and their political commissars to export communism to Kampuchea, Laos, Burma, southern Thailand and throughout the Malaysian peninsula. The French colonial interests were not saved. As for the Cold War domino theory and communist containment: after ten years of warfare and 58,000 American dead, the Vietnamese were not converted to democracy or saved from Ho Chi Minh’s communism. The country was not governed under western auspices, or even brought into the economic fold until recent years and then only by their own volition. In the end, the global ring of western treaty organizations such as SEATO that surrounded the communist states of the USSR and China could not be saved and this led to a weakened CENTO which limped along for a few more years until it's final dissolution upon the violent 1979 takeover of Iran by the tyrannical theocrat Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini who replaced the equally tyrannical monarch Shah Reza Pahlavi (his reign the result of a 1953 coup d'etat marked by CIA-sponsored violence and political assassination engineered by agent Kermit Roosevelt), leaving only NATO to contain the global stalwarts of communism -- China and the USSR. Some Americans may continue to delude themselves as to the result of the Vietnam War, but the current military and political quagmire in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 (as accurately predicted by then Defense Secretary Dick Chaney during the first Gulf War) bear out the truth in the statement that one is doomed to repeat a history not learned. The Vietnam war taught us that victory in war, as prosecuted by superpowers in the nuclear age, is impossible; an expensive lesson in terms of national wealth and lives that has been tragically lost to US leadership in the interim.
  • Well. let's see - Vietnam, Korea(?), Iraq. Enough, don't you think?
  • They had lost the Korean,Vietnam,Central America,Bosnia,and a loosing terribly in Iraq.
  • Yes, we are losing the war on drugs at this very moment.
  • There were two wars were the US has lost, The War of 1812 and the Vietnam war. In the war of 1812, the US tried to invade Canada but were repelled. The British army pushed them back and remained on US soil until a peace treaty was signed. In the Vietnam war, the US tried to support a non communist south Vietnamese government, but it was eventually overwhelmed by insurgents (the Viet Cong), and North Vietnamese regular military forces.
  • Oh, yes! See one Viet Nam, one Iraq, one Afghanistan...
  • The war of 1812. American aims were to invade Canada and stop impressment of sailors. They achieved neither. The US's invasion of Canada was turned back and British troops invaded US soil, only leaving after the Peace treaty was signed. The British stopped impressment even before the war started, and refused to give up the right to do it.
  • Vietnam is just one. And evidently we are losing the war on spelling given how many people write "loosing" in their answers.
  • Depends on how you define lost. Countries have a habit of spinning history . Vietnam was lost. The War of 1812 was certainly not a win but is sometimes spun as one. The Korean War was certainly not a win. The War on Terror is completely unwinnable.
  • What the British call the Canadian War, or the War of 1812. The US tried to invade Candada, but the troops they used were local militia and really didn't want to invade. Lots of people thought it was a bad idea. The British and Candadian militia pushed the US forces back across the border, and then attacked various cities, captured Maine, and burnt the Whitehouse. When the peace treaty was finally signed, the British troops left, and the Brits returned Maine to the US
  • your 3 month 2 late phil , do better than that!!!!!
  • I'm of the opinion that there's no such a thing as a war that has been fought and won. Both sides inevitably lose. That said, with the stakes at their highest and with firm support from the European continent, we did "win" freedom from Great Britain. Of course, thousands died and millions of dollars of debts were incurred which the several states didn't want to pay up on. The Civil War (can any war be civil?) resulted in 600,000 deaths, hundreds of millions in debts, and, the freeing of American slaves! Great success but at great cost! I think that there has been a significant margin of success in just about all of the wars into which we've entered - except - Korea - still there 50 years later suggests lack of an exit strategy 15 years after the need for "Soviet containment". Vietnam certainly didn't achieve any announced military objectives, although it might have made someone some money who had the right stocks or who sold and distributed illegal drugs. In my opinion, the US led war in Afghanistan hasn't been fought vigorously - partly because if we did so, it could turn bin Laden into a martyr and incite a nuclear war between Pakistan and India - so, we've been tredding on water over there. Then, there's Iraq. If the objective was to capture Saddam Hussein, then, yes. If the objective was to have a lasting military presence in the Middle East, yes. If the objective was to introduce democracy to an unstable part of the world, yes. If the objective was to serve as a stability threat to Saudi Arabia and to Iran, then yes. If it was to win over the hearts and souls of the Iraqi public, I doubt it.
  • Yes, in my opinion, but it was not due to being outmatched on the battlefield. We lost Vietnam because the Stateside powers that be at the time flat out quit on the troops, causing many to be humiliated and killed. Personally, I believe that the War on Terrorism, specifically the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan will end up being lost wars not because of lack of military effort or intelligence, but because of lack of stateside confidence. Obama just wants to tie things off and be done with it, even if they regroup and attack us or Israel. Lastly, Israel is acting militarily because they know that with Obama at the executive helm, Israel is on its own against the radical muslims of the Middle East. For them, it is do or die.
  • right now were losing the war on librealisem-freedom!!
  • Sorry. This was meant for the comments section. Please flag for deletion. But here is my answer anyway: Thank you.
  • Technicly, no. If we went on and actually attacked or launched an all out invasion on North Vietnam, the US would of won by every single aspect and the entire country of Vietnam would be under one democratic government. Public opinion was just so against the entire war so the US had no choice but to back down. North Vietnam would never of been able to of beaten the full force of the US military. Korea? No one one. It was an stalement. If we lost, there would be no such thing as Democratic South Korea right now. Iraq? The first Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm) in 1991, Iraq surrendered to the US. In a matter of weeks as a matter of fact. At the time, Iraq had the 4th/5th largest military in the world. The current Iraq war was started for two main reasons: 1) To take Suddam Huessein out of power. ACCOMPLISHED. 2) To make sure Iraqis weren't building WMD. ACCOMPLISHED. Now, US/NATO troops are being withdrawn from IRaq because they're not needed there. To say we're loosing the War On Terror is also very wrong. Afghanistan is now a much better place for it's citizens now that the Taliban fell.. and the amount of terrorist attacks have dropped significantly since the American invasion of Afghanisan in October 2001. BTW: The War of 1812 was also a stalement... no one won that.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy