A couple weeks ago during Black April, a few of my Vietnamese friends began sharing this video and repeating the claims made within it. Now, given that the source is Prager "University" (a conservative propaganda machine masquerading as education), I immediately distrusted the information contained within it.

I didn't challenge it because I wasn't really feeling like rubbing salt into the wounds during a time of mourning, but I also don't feel that I'm knowledgeable enough about the specifics of the Vietnam War to refute the claims made within it, and I honestly am quite ignorant of a lot of the military specifics of the war (I know the political stuff much better). Basically, my question is, to what extent is it accurate?

A couple main claims the video makes:

• The United States and South Vietnam were "winning the war decisively by every conceivable measure" in "late 1972."
• The North Vietnamese (and Viet Cong) agreement to the Paris Peace Accords in 1973 represented the "winning" of the war.
• The US then made a promise to the South Vietnamese to provide military hardware for defense.
• Nixon's resignation allowed the Democrats to use their new influence to defund this agreement with the South Vietnamese
• The North Vietnamese aggression post-1974 was them "testing" Gerald Ford, and because the US didn't fund the Vietnamese, the North was able to win.

It's obviously incredibly biased an interested in slandering the Democrats as best as possible. But how accurate is it?

Some seem to think it was the worst thing ever.

Others say the opposite

Pardon me if I am violating any subreddit rules. I looked in the sidebar in popular questions and there was no specific question that related to this.

Followup question: Did the Church ever suppress science in general (not Galileo, there's 100 threads on that)?

I'm wondering if they're related. To my understanding the Phoenicians had extensive trade routes. I've read one source that its possible the Straights of RioRhium rather than the Ismuth of Corinth might have been alluded to in Heraclean legend of the Dorian invasion

If so, then that means maybe there is a connection between sea faring peoples and Dorian's. Of course the only sea faring people with that capability were the declining Minoans (who were wiped out) and/or the Phoenicians. I'm wondering if some far off people got access to Phoenician shipbuilding and launched an invasion. Or... If there were a sea faring people invasion alongside a dorian one.

The main reasoning behind the dorian = sea faring is the sea peoples seemed to have left Phoenicians alone.

This is the statue: https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7217/7269525940_873a9504cf.jpg

This could really help me out during my finals, as I could shine with my knowledge, since even my teacher doesn't know.

Thank you very much in advance for answers.

Links to confuse and confound. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkb91g-ybIM http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/41431 http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/perspectives_1/article_8941.shtml http://www.africaw.com/africans-did-not-sell-their-own-people-into-slavery http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/slavetra.html http://yourblackworld.net/2013/07/22/african-king-apologizes-for-africas-role-in-slavery/