Topic: Vietnam War, lost or not.

Duty Honor Country · April 7th, 2006

We lost under the definitions of the US war aim.

The official reason why we were in Vietnam was to set a independent and communist free South Vietnam. Did we do this in the end? No we did not. We won most of the battles in the war. However, military victories do not guarantee complete victory. Tet is a great example of this. 100,000 VC and 80,000 NVA (give or take) rose up and attacked US and RVN forces all over South Vietnam. In purely military terms, the US waxed the enemy. In political terms, the VC and NVA delt the US a fatal political blow. For 3 years, LBJ and the government had been telling the people that the US very close to victory. Then the American People get to see thousands of enemy mount a huge offensive. In my opinion, it's no surprise that the American people lost faith in the government and abandoned support for the war. America was no longer willing to stomach the fight and demanded that the US pullout.

A big problem with the American strategy in Vietnam was a general lack of waging political war against the enemy. The US conentrated most of the war effort on killing the enemy rather than protecting the civilians and winning the hearts and minds of the locals. In insurgencies, denying the enemy access to the local population is as important as searching for and destroying the enemy. Look at the USMC's CAP (Combined Action Platoons). 7-15 Marines would move into a village, live with the locals and help the villagers defend against VC. The Marines called this "hold and defend." I am still doing research on CAP. My initial reaction is CAP was more successful than the Army's sreach and destroy tactic.

Oh, and North Vietnam won according to their war aims. Their war aims were to get rid of yet another imperial power (the US), overthrow the RVN government and unify Vietnam.

War is policy by other means

April 7th, 2006
Duty Honor Country Milforum Moderator	We lost under the definitions of the US war aim. The official reason why we were in Vietnam was to set a independent and communist free South Vietnam. Did we do this in the end? No we did not. We won most of the battles in the war. However, military victories do not guarantee complete victory. Tet is a great example of this. 100,000 VC and 80,000 NVA (give or take) rose up and attacked US and RVN forces all over South Vietnam. In purely military terms, the US waxed the enemy. In political terms, the VC and NVA delt the US a fatal political blow. For 3 years, LBJ and the government had been telling the people that the US very close to victory. Then the American People get to see thousands of enemy mount a huge offensive. In my opinion, it's no surprise that the American people lost faith in the government and abandoned support for the war. America was no longer willing to stomach the fight and demanded that the US pullout. A big problem with the American strategy in Vietnam was a general lack of waging political war against the enemy. The US conentrated most of the war effort on killing the enemy rather than protecting the civilians and winning the hearts and minds of the locals. In insurgencies, denying the enemy access to the local population is as important as searching for and destroying the enemy. Look at the USMC's CAP (Combined Action Platoons). 7-15 Marines would move into a village, live with the locals and help the villagers defend against VC. The Marines called this "hold and defend." I am still doing research on CAP. My initial reaction is CAP was more successful than the Army's sreach and destroy tactic. Oh, and North Vietnam won according to their war aims. Their war aims were to get rid of yet another imperial power (the US), overthrow the RVN government and unify Vietnam. War is policy by other means __________________ "The best form of taking care of troops is first-class training, for this saves unnecessary casualties." Erwin Rommel Last edited by Duty Honor Country; April 7th, 2006 at 19:20.