South Vietnam: Worthy Ally? (General Creighton Abrams Reassessing the ARVN)

thehistorynet ^ | 3-15-03 | Lewis Sorley

[SJackson]

Behind my opinion of the fecklessness of LBJ, it is also my opinion that this was not a war the US should have been involved in at all…There was not the fear that if Vietnam was lost it would be a bad thing for the US. On the contrary, the more third world countries the Soviet Union had to finance and administer, the sooner the Communist Bloc would crumble. I think Ronald Reagan and the fall of the Berlin Wall proved this strategy correct…The war in Vietnam had nothing to do with freedom vs communism. That was not the motive of LBJ (or Truman). The Democrats had the "monkey on their back" of commies in the government since FDR (they still do). The Democrats had to put on a show of fighting the communists, or loose elections to the Republicans here at home in the USA! As long as you look for a "Grand Strategy" or an "Art of War or "Bomb them till they Glow in the dark", you will have missed the point. Vietnam was national politics and an attempt to "stuff a ballot box" and not a Geopolitical, "Crusade for Freedom".

It could have been a worthwhile war, after our defeat the dominoes fell all over Central America and Africa, not to mention Cambodia and South Vietnam itself. You address the crux of the matter when you note he Democrats had to put on a show of fighting the communists, or loose elections to the Republicans here at home. That, and his place in history is what LBJ was fighting for. It didn’t have to be just politics, that was a function of who was in power, it’s what he made of it, just as Reagan’s victory in the cold war was. What would the history of a Carter 2nd term, perhaps followed by a Mondale presidency look like?

[SJackson]

I liked that, but since we're plugging Amazon, my personal favorite, especially if the media interests you. Big Story: How the American Press and Television Reported and Interpreted the Crisis of Tet 1968 in Vietnam and Washington [ABRIDGED], Peter Braestrup . You want the abridged version, since it's only 700 or so pages, they usually have it used.

[SJackson]

All the more reason to avoid the Korea-like defensive strategy, and go for a more offensive strategy. .... why *didnt* we march to Hanoi, or at least bomb the cr*p out of it until the Communists cried uncle? Or implement an actual Korea strategy, cut the trail and establish a line extending to the Thai border. Would have saved a lot of innocent lives, especially in Cambodia.

And the goal in a war, is not to kill the enemies soldiers, but to destroy his will to oppose your objectives.

You're right, your enemy isn't defeated, until he's been convinced he’s defeated.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

NEVER FORGET

'..GARDEN GROVE votes Free South Vietnam Flag -IN-, who's next..?'

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/news/863430/posts

...for FREEDOM.


Signed:..ALOHA RONNIE Guyer / Vet-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.LZXRAY.com

NEVER FORGET

[ALOHA RONNIE]

ALOHA RONNIE's...

Fight for FREEDOM in Vietnam Threads:

http://www.Freerepublic.com/perl/profile?u=18629

[elbucko]

What would the history of a Carter 2nd term, perhaps followed by a Mondale presidency look like?

I shudder to contemplate that scenario. Mondale would have been "Carter II". As feckless a leader as Carter. Remember "Stagflation"? Remember the Olympic boycott of the Carter years? Remember the Iran hostages? Remember Carters military operation to rescue them? That was Carters "Vietnam"! Once again, too little, too late. Remember the fate of the hostages after Reagan was elected? Reagan fired not a shot, yet caused the hostages to be released. Democrats threats are hollow and the world knows it. Republicans tend to act. Enemies know this. (That's why Europe is calling "W" a "Cowboy". BTW, the allegory has merit in the context of the movie "High Noon".)

So the two Carter terms and two subsequent Mondale (Gag) terms, that you postulate, would have gone on to 1992. Frightening prospect, isn't it? Anyway, had the Soviet Union had the world it wanted, it would have been a handful. Cuba is an example, as well as No. Korea, on the feasibility of pure communism. They would and did suck the Soviet Union dry! The Soviet Union would still have fallen, even if the Democats had tried to prevent it. It was attempting to be a real "Empire".

(There are still many in the American Left that believe communism has not flourished because it has never been tried in a pure fashion. Which begs the question, does the struggle itself, eventually kill communism. I maintain that it does.)

Vietnam would have been a winnable war had it not been for the geography. With Red China to the East with an endless supply of men and arms, Vietnam, at best, would have been a trench war of attrition, like WWI. It almost was.

..."after our defeat the dominoes fell all over Central America and Africa,.."

And so? Africa is a non-starter. Central and So. America are different in their geography to Vietnam, as night is to day, as well as different in commitment and threat. The Monroe Doctrine comes into play in this hemisphere.

What Mondale would have done is irrelevant. The choice, under the conditions that you describe, would not have been his to make.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

NEVER FORGET


.."WE WERE SOLDIERS".. Forum

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=8


NEVER FORGET

[elbucko]

Or implement an actual Korea strategy, cut the trail and establish a line extending to the Thai border.

Oh Geeze! LOOK AT A MAP. Than what do you do when you cut Cambodia in half on the way to the Thai border? Defend "So. Cambodia" from the communist in No. Cambodia?

Vietnam is not a peninsula, it is part of the MAINLAND of Chinese Asia. Look at a map and tell me how-in-the-H*ll you would defend those borders and that topography.

You guys are still fighting that war with the same mentality as the people that got us into it and the same lack of "military awareness".

[elbucko]

...the American approach was basically to take over the war from the South Vietnamese and try to win it militarily by conducting a war of attrition.

Put another way: "What would a Democrat do".