Tet II: An American Recessional?

Intellectual Conservative ^ | 23 October 2003 | Christopher J. Barr

[FlameThrower]

The left spun the Viet Cong defeat in Tet as a Viet Cong victory -- and lost us a war on the periphery. Now it is all happening again -- Tet II. They portray our emerging victory in Iraq as a defeat -- and risk the West’s very survival in the war on Islamic terror.

[RKV]

I am trying to recall which memoire of a senior VC it was where he said that the North was just about ready to throw in the towel after Tet. If we had kept pushing instead of backing off, the Cong would have lost.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Long, but good.

The seeds of our defeat in Vietnam had been sown seven years earlier in the 1968 Tet Offensive. This is remembered today as an American defeat. It was not. It was -- or should have been -- a decisive military defeat for the Communists. American military power, however ineptly deployed, had forced them to move prematurely to “conventional tactics” -- which, as Mao taught, is how guerilla wars are lost.

The Communists expected the civilian population to rise up in support; it did not. In fact, horrified by Communist brutality, citizens of the South rallied to their government. The Communists hoped that the South Vietnamese Army would collapse; it did not. Taken by surprise, many ARVN units fought with great skill and bravery. And, post-Tet, South Vietnamese enlistments actually increased. The loss of tens of thousands of Viet Cong fighters in the cities broke the back of the indigenous guerilla movement. The North Vietnamese Army was forced into a conventional war America could have won -- if only she had still wanted to.

But Tet inflicted a fatal wound on American morale. The battle shifted from the streets of Saigon and Hue to the streets of New York, Chicago and San Francisco. The newsrooms of the New York Times, Washington Post, CBS, NBC and ABC spun Tet as an American defeat -- as a sign of Viet Cong strength rather than Viet Cong desperation. It was no longer a war for the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese. Their minds were made up; they persevered. It was now a war for the heart and mind of Walter Cronkite. And there, an American defeat was forged out of an American victory.

Perception became reality. American forces withdrew. For years, despite deep incursions of NVA forces into her territory, South Vietnam held on. But enemy advances were made on our home front. And, seven years after Tet, the American Left hand-delivered Ho Chi Minh his victory on a silver platter.

Radical Islamists and Baathists learned from Tet. They do not even try to defeat us on the ground where we are strong. They aim directly at the soft underbelly of western culture: at a new generation of Cronkites, at the mental and moral weakness of the Western cultural elite.

Read the whole thing, as Glenn Reynolds likes to say.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Fifth Column Left Ping

[archy]

I am trying to recall which memoire of a senior VC it was where he said that the North was just about ready to throw in the towel after Tet. If we had kept pushing instead of backing off, the Cong would have lost.

Vo Nguyen Giap. Though he was neither a South Vietnamese *Viet Cong*, nor the most senior strategist for the North Vietnamese Army.

-archy-/-

[AZLiberty]

If you do read the whole thing, you'll get to the closing comment, which hints about a desire to "festoon the nation’s telephone poles with members of the opinion elite".

Great line.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[RKV]

Thanks for the fact checking. Giap was only the equivalent of a 4 star general. I believe the analogy runs true here. We need some faith and a willingness to press our advantages (and we have many in this case). The media can still poison the public's minds on this one, however.

[toddst]

We need some faith and a willingness to press our advantages (and we have many in this case). The media can still poison the public's minds on this one, however.

True. However, we have the tremendous advantage of true leadership with George W. and his crew, as opposed to LBJ and his micromanaging of military actions in Vietnam. Old "Corn-Pone" Johnson and friends did us in, not the other enemy.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Read NOT SO INNOCENT. Ties in well with this discussion.

[RKV]

You mean "Landslide Lyndon?" I thought it was Kennedy who got us suckered into Nam. I recall that Ike told him to leave well enough alone with French colonial failures, but no, he was the best and the brightest (drug addled, wife cheating, vote buying, .... war hero SOB) we could elect. I am not a fan of Nixon, but I wish he had made a stink about how the ballot boxes were stuffed in Chicago.

[R. Scott]

How will George W. react if the leftist media succeed in organizing and staging anti-war demonstrations on the scale of the later years of the Viet Nam War?
Fortunately we don’t have a draft, so there is not the incentive for collage kids to protest in hopes of stopping it before they lose their exceptions.

[Jim Noble]

Posted here already, with discussion.

[toddst]

How will George W. react if the leftist media succeed in organizing and staging anti-war demonstrations on the scale of the later years of the Viet Nam War?

A good question. I suspect such protests won't happen due to our being successful in getting Iraq going while smothering the terrorist opposition there. Just my opinion.

[PsyOp]

I am trying to recall which memoire of a senior VC...

Not sure who you are talking about, but General Giap, commander of the NVA, is on record as saying they could not have one the war without the help of our media; and, that they waged their war as much on American television as in the jusgle.

Also, after Tet, the VC were practically a non-factor. Most of them had exposed themselves during Tet and were eliminated. After Tet most actions were between our forces and the NVA. Giap called Tet a military disaster and public relations victory. They lost battle that won them the war.

[exnavy]

Great read, thanks for the bump.