The Vietnam War?

[Jimmy]

Not going to post a great deal, I'm sure the conversation will bring out all of the major points, providing someone replies of course.

I've read a few books on Vietnam in the past 8 months or so, especially recommended are 'We were soldiers once ......and young' and 'Once A Warrior King: Memoirs of an Officer in Vietnam', it is a war that very much intirigues and interests me. Perhaps the most 'alluring' factor is that of its questioned validity, the issue that young men, around the age that I am now (22), were sent to fight a war in a foreign country whilst there was no immediately apparent threat to their own.

As i've said i don't want to write a great deal, id rather respond with my own personal opinions to the comments of others. What has surprised me however, having done some research tonight, is that the 'Tet Offensive' by the North, or more specifically in this instance the VietCong was infact a major military loss for the VC. It effectively ended the role that Communist operatives in the south, acting under the banner of the VC, could play in the war.

Of course I can only refer to what I have read in books and read on the internet, but from the sources I have read tonight, and there have been more than a couple, the 'Tet' offensive was infact an American victory. This has surprised me as I had always believed that the offensive was the 'straw that broke the camels back', the act that ensured the Americans were in no doubt that they would not win the war.

Of course the debate which I'm sure will arise on here, if the topic interests anyone, is how to define the term 'victory'.

American forces withdrew from South Vietnam leaving the North to invade and conquer - surely this means America lost the Vietnam war.

However it can be argued that the American committment in Vietnam demonstrated to those with Communist ambitions that America would take action against this {perceived} threat, and in doing so it prevented the much fretted over 'Domino effect' theory coming to fruition.

Anybody care to share their views?

[annanimo]

Of course the debate which I'm sure will arise on here, if the topic interests anyone, is how to define the term 'victory'.

However it can be argued that the American committment in Vietnam demonstrated to those with Communist ambitions that America would take action against this {perceived} threat, and in doing so it prevented the much fretted over 'Domino effect' theory coming to fruition.

Anybody care to share their views?

The so called "domino effect" theory was the product of a paranoid American administration and its misunderstanding of the threat posed by Soviet "communism". Successive US governments created unnecessary tension as a result of their doctrinaire interpretation of communism and the threat it supposedly had towards world peace.

World peace was actually compromised by US-Soviet relations, the misunderstandings they had of each other's intentions and the uneasy peace on the security council.

I'm not entirely convinced that if left alone, South East Asia would have succumbed to the "domino effect"; or that if indeed communism had spread across that part of the world it would necessarily be of a type loyal to the USSR. US involvement in fact was more likely to have swayed opinion away from their values and towards communism, just as today the US forces are resented in the Middle East and their presence responsible (in part at least) for a rise in anti-US feeling.

As for "victory" in Vietnam? I do not think anybody can claim it. Certainly the US forces, embarassed not only by their military ineptitude but widely criticized for the inhuman atrocities committed in Vietnam, come out with little credit. If anything, it was a victory for the anti-war brigade who were consistently proved right on many points. Importantly, Vietnam demonstrated the futility of US foreign policy and its trust in its own military strength.

I don't have a detailed knowledge of Vietnam and it would be interesting to see what others have to say on here. But from my limited knowledge, I have to say that the whole saga was one of the most regrettable and ill-advised military actions of the century.

[Spud55]

The biggest mistake was the conception of the domino effect, which hadn't ever been proven to be correct and wasn't really happening at all, it was a creation of a paranoid state. Both sides did it though.

Because of this they didn't see that Vietnam started and would possibly have remained without interference, an internal conflict.

Initially the conflict started as a fight against French Imperialism, with the viet minh, controlled by Ho-Chi minh eventually getting what they wanted, independance from the French. Arguably had it not been fro the French the who war never would have happened, after the Second World war because of the Us dominance of the western world with her anti imperial stance, the French signed and agreed to leave Vietnam. However being French they decided not to bother to honour their agreements, and went back in, and were fought hard by the Viet Minh. Now despite Ho-chi minh being a communist, many of his forces especially in the south were not, but were united by a common enemy, so fought side by side. After some time the French were not doing terribly well, and because of the irrational fear of the spread of communism, the Us decided to support the french, instead of telling them to get out and honour their agreements made prior.

Eventually the french were defeated and Vietnam was independant, and was split in two. This is where another mistake was made. The Us supported the South vietnamese leader Diem, who was a moron, he couldn't manage a (Am I naughty or what!) up in a brewery let alone a country. The viet minh in south Vietnam were fairly happy, they had what they wanted and didn't on the whole want a communist state in South Vietnam. However in his infinate wisdom diem decided to label all of them viet Cong (vietnamese Communists) and began persecuting them horribly, having many executed, imprisoned or tortured.

This understandibly annoyed them, because they had been the people that had fought and died to free Vietnam from French rule, they should have been heros but instead they were villified by Diem. So they started to fight the opression of Diem, the North were not involved at this point and didn't become officially involved until much later. This was an internal conflict that had little or nothing to do with communism.

Because of Us paranoia they were like oh poo, communism is spreading, rraarrr.

So they decided to support Diem more and more, despite knowing that he was an evil dictator who had been persecuting his people, but as with many things in high politics, the us policy of self determination was a fallacy, you were free to determine your own future as long as it was the future that the US wanted for you, bit like now really. As clauswitz said "war is an extension of politics by other means"

Many of the Vietnamese supported the VC because they were on the whole better than Diem, for example when the VC liberated a village from state control, the land was given to the pesants and they moved on, when state forces liberated a village, they brought back the land owners and demanded back payment of rent in some cases up to 5 years worth, and forced the pesants to pay.

Eventually the US became more and more involved and were just looking for something to give them some kind of legitimate reason to attack the North. A couple of patroll boats attacked the USS maddox, was kinda pointless as all they did was leave a few marks on the hull, but that irritated the US slightly, but still wasn't enough as well the evidence of the attack was insubstantial at best. So they decided in true US fassion to make something up. Because of this alledged attack the USS Turner Joy was ordered to support the Maddox. One Night, i think the Maddox radar was on the blink, and the turner joys' targeting system was on the blink as well or something like that, so both ships couldn't see very well. Then apparently a few blips appeared on the radar of the turner Joy, but they couldn't target so told the Maddox where to fire. So there was a lot of firing at absolutely sod all as there was nothing there, pilots overhead confirmed that they didn't see a thing, nobody on either ship saw anything, there were no marks or bullet holes left on either ship, no debris from the patrol boats no anything really.

So there was no evidence to support the idea that there was any kind of attack on either the Maddox or the Turner Joy, anyone in a position to see anything said in their debriefing that there was nothing there, the commander of the pilots overhead said that he saw absolutely nothing, no wake, no fireing coming from anywhere other than the Maddox or Turner Joy, basically that there was nothing out there. All his pilots corroberated this story. However mirraculously after their CIA debriefings suddenly some of the pilots said they could confirm that there were NV patrol boats attacking the two ships, while the commander maintained that nothing was out there. So because of this operation rolling thunder began.

So thats a little background on why the conflict came about.

The "tet" offensive was a complete failure in a millitary sense in that they Vietnamese forces were slaughtered, just like they were any time they tried to engage the US in large scale open warfare. However because of very poor news reporting it was a key moment for the VC, they managed to get to the Us embassy in Saigon, they didn't breach it, infact they didn't even get close to doing so, and they never would have done. However the US news agencies in their wisdom decided that it would be a great idea to report that it had been breached, this completely destroyed already waining public confidence in the conflict, and from that point on the conflict became untennable.

If you are looking for some books to read on Vietnam, Vietnam a History by Stanley Karnow is a very good book, it's not a small book but it is a very good and comprehensive history of vietnam.

Also there is a book titled something like Vietnam and Afghanistan a comparison, can't remember who it is by but it's a very good book, talks alot about the legitimacy of the regimes put in place by the US and Soviets in Vietnam and Afghanistan, and a lot about the reasoning behind why they got involved and stuff like that, as they were very similar conflicts in many ways.

[One Team In Keynsham]

It provided extensive material for some cracking films.

[hilltop red]

It provided extensive material for some cracking films.

[Gerry Gows' Tash]

And the best sountrack of any war in history !

Seriously though the paralells with Iraq are worrying

A remote, open ended war with unclear aims and a non-existent exit strategy

Public support for the war divided and waning - this is what ultimately forced america to withdraw

Based on cultural naievety and driven by a dogmatic paranoia

An invisible enemy; swop "terrorists" for "communists", bush for nixon, the rhetoric is excatly the same

Mounting losses without the acheivment of any tangible objectives

More seriously, the biggest lesson of vietnam (and the russians in afganistan,and to an extent the british in northern ireland) is that it's nigh on impossible to beat an indiginous geurrilla army on their own turf with conventional military tactics

It seems that each generation makes the same mistakes as its fathers - The great lesson of history is that nothing ever changes.........

If you wanna see some good vietnam films I'd recommend

Apocalypse now - by far the most intelligent and sensitive depiction of vietnam (or any war) I have ever seen, my favorite film ever

The Deer Hunter - some would say it's not really about vietnam and it does drag a bit at the start, but brings home the impact of the war and its aftermath on the people who go and the ones left behind. The Russian Roulette sequence is stunning.

Full metal jacket - Different but shockingly good

Platoon - A bit more traditional hollywood treatment but very realistic and a top performance by Charlie Sheen

Hamburger Hill - if you can find it ! A good squaddies eye view of the chaos and bloodshed of vietnam

[Jimmy]

Apocalypse now - by far the most intelligent and sensitive depiction of vietnam (or any war) I have ever seen, my favorite film ever

You're preaching to the choir!

[bucksred]

A war started for the right reasons, poorly executed, constant interferance from politicians, majority of troops unwilling conscripts..........hell recipe for disaster, jest like Iraq (Substitute National Guard reservists, for conscripts back then) small number of allies, professionally led............hell its just like Iraq, lets hope the result don't turn out the same

[Ruffus T Firefly]

"Apocalypse now - by far the most intelligent and sensitive depiction of vietnam (or any war) I have ever seen, my favorite film ever"

Its amazing how many times I can watch this film, and never grow bored.

Its the whole atmosphere, a complete masterpiece, and as for the inclusion of The Doors number, The End, well what can you say, pure genius.

The horror....the horror.

[Jimmy]

as for the inclusion of The Doors number, The End, well what can you say, pure genius.

The beginning sequence with The Doors 'The End' and the Napalm strike is sensational, quite possibly the best opening to a film I have seen.