Question for Vietnam Vets

When did you first realize that the 'war' was wrong?
I was sent to 'Nam in July 1966 when the troop built up was going strong. When I got there, there were about 180,000 troops.
First hand knowledge of incompetant doings came early. The politicians would not allow our troops to do anything that WW2 troops did. Halting the bombing of N. Vietnam was a slap in the grunts face as they were fighting and dieing just for "body counts". We couldn't return fire in several locations because of "civilian casualties". Arvin troops, except for a very few. were useless. High ranking guys were getting medals and promotions just for showing up after a major battle.

I never thought it was "wrong", but it was badly fought, with the wrong people-LBJ and Macnamara in charge. Yes, for too many careerists it was just a way of punching their tickets and a way to accelerated promotions-"There's nothing like a chest full of ribbons and the old war record when the promotion board meets" to quote Anthony Herbert.

What you say about too many field grade officers and rules of engagement are correct. The real combat was handled by company grade officers, while "supervised" by field grade officers, at a considerable distance. We were never allowed to strike the enemy where his war fighting ability would be degraded. Washington did not want to win, only to drag it out as long as possible to discourage Russian and Chinese support. All this said, we were killing communists on a large scale, and we were winning, when I left country. Regards, Clark

We must have been there at the same time!

I'll ask the follow-up question: specifically, what would have won the war? I'll suggest nuking Hanoi would not be considered a realistic option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by togor

I'll ask the follow-up question: specifically, what would have won the war? I'll suggest nuking Hanoi would not be considered a realistic option.

---

We should have never stopped bombing the North! By doing so it only let the North keep on supplying their troops in the South. Restricting our troops from returning fire was wrong too. As for Officers leading troops in the field, it was non-coms that lead their squads/platoon. Taking ground by troops and then giving same ground back to the VC and Northern troops was a waste of our casualties. While I was there, we ran into several U.S. contractors who were making big bucks while we had to defend them.

I can't help but think geography doomed the Vietnam campaign from the start. The long Laotian border, the cover of the jungle, the low-tech logistics efforts of the Vietnamese. It would have required a huge number of boots on the ground, and for what? Regarding air-dropped ordnance, I thought I read that the amount dropped in Vietnam was already a good bit more than WW2. Korea is at least a peninsula in the south, so while technically part of the Asian land mass, it isn't smack on the Asian continent like Vietnam. It's just hard for me to see what enduring victory in Vietnam would look like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhawknj

I never thought it was "wrong", but it was badly fought, with the wrong people-LBJ and Macnamara in charge. Yes, for too many careerists it was just a way of punching their tickets and a way to accelerated promotions-"There's nothing like a chest full of ribbons and the old war record when the promotion board meets" to quote Anthony Herbert.

---

You're right -- it was a war worth winning, but that wasn't permitted. MacNamara's strategy of "gradual escalation" was a disaster. And fighting in friendly territory was simply a losing strategy.

The best strategy would have been to invade North Viet Nam, crossing the Ben Hai River, and forcing the NVA into a set-piece battle, then landing a couple of divisions of Marines and an airborne division or two behind them and annihilating them.

Vietnamization should have been started a lot sooner, in Korea by Summer 1953 3/4 of the front line was held by ROK units. Granted, we controlled the logistics to keep Syngman Rhee from launching his own offensives.
In Vietnam the decision was made in early 1964 NOT to have a joint US-ARVN command, partly to acknowledge their sensitivities, partly out of serious concerns over security-moles helped to undermine Chiang Kai-shek. However this led to a situation like that of the Axis in WWII-Mussolini's "Parallell War". High level staff talks between the Germans and the Italians were not started until May, 1943.
Vietnam started to go badly when the Army left behind its professional phase and entered its "careerist" phase. I read an account which described the visit of CSA General Harold Johnson to the commander of the 1st Infantry Division in late 1967. The purpose of General Johnson's visit was not to discuss tactics, strategy, equipment-morale-but to deal with complaints that the then commander was too quick to relieve subordinates who couldn't perform in combat and an assignment to that unit was a career wrecker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vern Humphrey

The best strategy would have been to invade North Viet Nam, crossing the Ben Hai River, and forcing the NVA into a set-piece battle, then landing a couple of divisions of Marines and an airborne division or two behind them and annihilating them.

---

Some sort of PLA response was no doubt on the minds of US planners. Mao had cadres to burn.

https://youtu.be/7LUUk6wVNrY

did you ever read, A BRIGHT SHINING LIE about army lt. colonel JOHN PAUL VANN.

China was in the throes of the Cultural Revolution in the 1960s,later in the brief border conflict they had with North Vietnam the PLA came off second best.

Most of the North's supplies came by sea thru Haiphong not overland thru China yet we never mined the harbor till 1972 ! When Nixon did and they ran out of SAM's they went to the table . The bombing halts were stupid on our part.

Big picture....once US combat forces left Vietnam, it was only a matter of time. The same may yet be true for Korea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by togor

Big picture....once US combat forces left Vietnam, it was only a matter of time. The same may yet be true for Korea.

---

And the Middle East countries!

The Vietnam war. A war to prevent the takeover of South VN by North VN. A war to stop the spread of communism. Think of all the lives lost, the money spent and the disgrace of America by having to pull out w/o a win.

NOW, just a few years later, it is common to have socialist/communist politicians and entire parties in the U.S. They are somehow allowed to stay here and the voters are somehow allowed to stay here.

Other than the guaranteed resistance anti-American comments by the forums socialist does this make sense to anyone?

As a highly trained and valuable PFC. I could not see how we could come out on top with the way it was being fought

. Being 18 and knowing absolute XXXX about the people
their amazing history of warfare and endurance, I cared little for them personally. They were all gxxxs . to me
Why was it OK for us to stop at borders and the NVA . could build highways to wherever they wanted?
Years later,I think if VICTORY was not even defined by the brass, we could have blocked the borders with the same amount of men we had there already and forget the "War of Attrition" . I had heard, but never found out if our Allies in France, England, Canada or Germany were aiding the NVA with medical supplies and other essentials
There were lots of lies perpetrated by the brass and the press. All which worked against us.. I remember talking to a friend there who asked . " Just what the fxxk do they
have here ? Gold ? oil? Uranium" . Just tell us and it would make sense. The troops were used and misused daily. They were willing to fight, given a legit,reason
the NVA were willing to DIE, and in huge numbers to achieve their aims . That didn't make them right, but they got what they wanted

For the most part, ARVN troops were not trusted by U.S. troops. The ROK troops from So. Korea were brutal and feared by the VC/NVA. Australlian troops performed very well. Very early on, I observed that our government did not know how to win the war.

Was in the Nam in early '66. Within a very short period of time we knew there were too many dirt bag politicians that would stop us from winning the war, and the draft dodgers and protestors were right up there with them. It was not long before all too many of us believed we were wearing the uniform for ourselves...and shortly thereafter for all of those civilians back home that cared.

When it was clear that Bush was not going to bring our troops home after taking Iraq, it was clear to me that nothing had changed in the political arena concerning the war(s) in the Middle East.

James

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Tom

For the most part, ARVN troops were not trusted by U.S. troops. The ROK troops from So. Korea were brutal and feared by the VC/NVA. Australlian troops performed very well. Very early on, I observed that our government did not know how to win the war.

---

Bingo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JWM

Was in the Nam in early '66. Within a very short period of time we knew there were too many dirt bag politicians that would stop us from winning the war, and the draft dodgers and protestors were right up there with them. It was not long before all too many of us believed we were wearing the uniform for ourselves...and shortly thereafter for all of those civilians back home that cared.

When it was clear that Bush was not going to bring our troops home after taking Iraq, it was clear to me that nothing had changed in the political arena concerning the war(s) in the Middle East.

James

- - - Updated - - -



Bingo!

---

During my second tour, I was with the 1st Bde, 5th ID -- which was part of the 3rd Marine Division (one of only two combined Army-Marine divisions to see combat.) 3rd MarDiv was right on the DMZ.

At one time we were using the 9th Marines Tactical Operations Center (TOC) and they had a huge scale map that covered a whole wall. The map had a steel backing and they had magnetic graphics -- you could show an operation quite easily with a setup like that.

One time, out of boredom, we set up an invasion of North Viet Nam, with an amphibious force landing up the coast to encircle the NVA who would have HAD to fight us. A senior officer came in, saw what we had, and xxxx a brick! "Take that down! What if some newsman sees it?"

The American military did everything asked of it and more in the Viet Nam war. That no one cared
at the time we did that was criminal. Amnesty to draft dodgers only confirmed how criminal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlitzKrieg

The American military did everything asked of it and more in the Viet Nam war. That no one cared
at the time we did that was criminal. Amnesty to draft dodgers only confirmed how criminal.

---

Let me put it this way -- Jimmy Carter is NOT my favorite ex-president. He and the protestors who encouraged the enemy to hang on -- kill enough Americans and you can win on the streets of the US what you could not win on the battlefield.

Find a Soldier’s Pregnant Wife


Find a soldier’s pregnant wife
And you can have some fun
Tell her husband was just killed
And laugh about what you’ve done

Listen to her crying
Smile your self-righteous smile
Feel smug about yourself
You made a woman cry

Her husband is far away
And she must live with her fear
She is all alone
With no one to comfort her

You have inflicted misery
Almost more than she can bear
If her husband was here
You know you wouldn’t dare

And when he comes home wounded
You can have more fun
Imagining his wife telling him
About what you have done

You call yourself a protester
And rationalize your act
You have shown yourself a coward
And that is just a fact

You smugly say, “I saved your life/”
So this is what I’ll do
I’ll live to piss on your grave
And have my fun, too

Vern- That is precisely why I told my wife when and if it happened, how she would be notified and how to verify.

The low life protestors are still around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PWC

Vern- That is precisely why I told my wife when and if it happened, how she would be notified and how to verify.

The low life protestors are still around.

---

I'm collecting piss in 5-gallon cans for them. See you at the funeral!

Quote:

---

I'm collecting piss in 5-gallon cans for them. See you at the funeral!

---

i'm going to schidt on their grave.
I had an aazzhole boss that did the "how did it feel to kill all those babies"?

The war was not wrong, how it was fought was wrong. Not going all out to win was wrong. Washington involvement at the foxhole level was wrong.

Had a classmate who'd been brown water navy. We were ROTC and he braced me up one Saturday in a bar. 'Why are you against the war?' 'Don't you think it's stupid to fight a war there's no intention to win?' End of that discussion.

We (the United States of America) have NOT WON a war since WW 2 and depending on who you are talking to, some folks believe we really did NOT win that one either!
SO, Our politicians get us into this schiddt and then cut and run and bale out and NOBODY is held responsible. We got a DRAW in So. Korea when we could have WON. WE (the politicians and the MEDIA) made sure we LOST in Vietnam. GIAP himself said he was ready to QUIT after TET of 68 until he saw OUR SLIMESTREAM MEDIA spouting their propaganda.! (look it up!) We left behind 85 BILLION in "stan" in weapons and uncle sugar and all the libs want to confiscate your 38 special!! GIVE me a BREAK.
SO. WHO is getting PAID OFF for all this?? There should be TREASON trials all over the place and I'm not seeing anything.
Eisenhower said "BEWARE of the military industrial complex".
Your thoughts?

If we had politicians with balls, that wouldn't happen.