- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Could any strategy have worked in Vietnam?
Posted on 7/7/18 at 9:24 pm to Wolfhound45
Posted on 7/7/18 at 9:24 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:is the only answer
not getting involved
Posted on 7/8/18 at 1:40 pm to Wolfhound45
Getting a do over in 1945 the US could have allied itself with Ho and he never would have given himself over to the Reds. He saw common cause against the Japanese with the USA. Had the US persuaded France to give up its colonial empire instead of trying to hang on to it, everyone would be happier today.
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:41 pm to Wolfhound45
We could have invaded properly with Generals calling the shots and taken over Vietnam in 8 weeks!
Posted on 7/8/18 at 4:31 pm to Wolfhound45
Yes,really very simple, acted as President Trump as acted, let the Chief Staff run the war.
This post was edited on 7/8/18 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 7/8/18 at 9:59 pm to Wolfhound45
Yes.
Total war. Go after Hanoi and pressure the frick out of neighboring countries to cut off the Cong supply lines (carrot [$$] first, then the hammer if they don't play along).
Total war. Go after Hanoi and pressure the frick out of neighboring countries to cut off the Cong supply lines (carrot [$$] first, then the hammer if they don't play along).
Posted on 7/9/18 at 10:35 am to Wolfhound45
quote:
Was there anything we could have done other than not getting involved at all?
Just 1 thing; go into with the goal of winning, as in annihilate North Viet Nam
Posted on 7/9/18 at 10:50 am to Wolfhound45
I recently visited vietnam.
We could have taken over the country if we had brought everything we could, but then we would have faced insurrection for however long the occupation lasted.
We really screwed the pooch on this one. It will be interesting in 20 years to compare/contrast what happened in Iraq to vietnam.
btw, the vietnamese I met held no grudge against americans. they loved americans, and were super friendly.
We could have taken over the country if we had brought everything we could, but then we would have faced insurrection for however long the occupation lasted.
We really screwed the pooch on this one. It will be interesting in 20 years to compare/contrast what happened in Iraq to vietnam.
btw, the vietnamese I met held no grudge against americans. they loved americans, and were super friendly.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 8:50 pm to Wolfhound45
Did generals get to consider all approaches?
No.
It was political.
Only.
It was a sham.
You have to win the hearts and minds first.
The local politics was as bad as Iraq. Worse.
Fwiw, if you were going to do such a war, train your people better.
What is objective?
If the enemy uses Mao propaganda and training methods, maybe they will also use Mao tactics.
They moved troops through commie Laos to move troops. Surprised?
Target rich environment.
No.
It was political.
Only.
It was a sham.
You have to win the hearts and minds first.
The local politics was as bad as Iraq. Worse.
Fwiw, if you were going to do such a war, train your people better.
What is objective?
If the enemy uses Mao propaganda and training methods, maybe they will also use Mao tactics.
They moved troops through commie Laos to move troops. Surprised?
Target rich environment.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 10:04 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Was there anything we could have done
Protect President Kennedy instead of setting him up to be assasinated...
Posted on 7/11/18 at 11:38 pm to Wolfhound45
IMHO, yes, BUT, pursuing such a strategy might have been beyond the capabilities of the "reigning" US military and political leaders of that time.
The first phase of The Strategy would involve direct negotiations between US political leaders and China, the Soviet Union and even North Vietnam. At those talks, the USA could have made its war aims clear -- independence and peace for the two separate nations of South and North Vietnam. The USA would inform all parties that the USA would wage Total War to achieve its war aims, and that North Vietnam's entire infrastructure would be targeted in this war -- to include all of its industrial and maritime infrastructure, such as port facilities and railroads.
Second Phase: Fulfill the promises made at the talks, should North Vietnam persist in its conventional and unconventional efforts to conquer the Republic of South Vietnam.
Third Phase: Ongoing throughout US involvement -- shape the nascent South Vietnamese nation-state to shape and improve develop its methods of governance -- give it a sort of crash course on civil rights, a judicial system, etc.
Of course, this Strategy might have provoked China and the Soviet Union into a wider war. Low risk of that happening, IMHO, so, that's why IMHO, this Strategy could have worked.
The KEY to the Strategy would be to make it clear to North Vietnam that the USA would guarantee it's sovereignty AND would make North Vietnam a trading partner, should that some day be mutually beneficial. At some point, my guess is that North Vietnam would have chosen peace, because we would have been killing so many millions of those people that they would be running out of men and women.
The first phase of The Strategy would involve direct negotiations between US political leaders and China, the Soviet Union and even North Vietnam. At those talks, the USA could have made its war aims clear -- independence and peace for the two separate nations of South and North Vietnam. The USA would inform all parties that the USA would wage Total War to achieve its war aims, and that North Vietnam's entire infrastructure would be targeted in this war -- to include all of its industrial and maritime infrastructure, such as port facilities and railroads.
Second Phase: Fulfill the promises made at the talks, should North Vietnam persist in its conventional and unconventional efforts to conquer the Republic of South Vietnam.
Third Phase: Ongoing throughout US involvement -- shape the nascent South Vietnamese nation-state to shape and improve develop its methods of governance -- give it a sort of crash course on civil rights, a judicial system, etc.
Of course, this Strategy might have provoked China and the Soviet Union into a wider war. Low risk of that happening, IMHO, so, that's why IMHO, this Strategy could have worked.
The KEY to the Strategy would be to make it clear to North Vietnam that the USA would guarantee it's sovereignty AND would make North Vietnam a trading partner, should that some day be mutually beneficial. At some point, my guess is that North Vietnam would have chosen peace, because we would have been killing so many millions of those people that they would be running out of men and women.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 12:32 am to Wolfhound45
Yeah. Never going on the first place and not supporting France's Empire after ww2.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 6:24 am to Wolfhound45
My uncle commanded a base in Vietnam as a Marine Colonel aviator. He said that “every time they made progress they were told to withdraw. Politics got in the way.”
My analysis: It’s almost like the military industrial complex wanted to drag the war on so they continue to sell arms to both sides.
My analysis: It’s almost like the military industrial complex wanted to drag the war on so they continue to sell arms to both sides.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News