If the US were to fight the Vietnam war today, would we win?

[Lancer]

Our tech edge is much greater now, we have a president that has a 'go in and win' attitude, the Sovs are belly up and the Chinese are living high on a flood of new dollars they might not want to lose.

Regarding the tech edge:

Night vision is much better and we have alot more of them.

Our choppers now don't even compare to what we had before.

Smart bombs

Stealth planes

Tunnel detecting radar

Bradley

Thoughts?

[Serb]

Re: If the US were to fight the Vietnam war today, would we win?

Originally posted by Lancer
If the US were to fight the Vietnam war today, would we win?

Sure.
No Soviets- no problems. You could simply nuke them anytime you wish, but it wouldn't be nesscesary. Without Soviet military aid Vietnam would lost anyway.
Go get your revenge, the road is clear now.

[Lancer]

I don't believe that the Vietnam war was morally justified Serb. My question is 'would we win', not 'was it right'.

[Spiffor]

I believe you'd win the war, because there wouldn't be such a mobilization in the Vietnamese population today than 30 years ago, and no soviet support.

The tech edge is nearly unsignificant, because once Vietnam's infrastructure would be destroyed, the war would turn into guerilla warfare in the jungle. The only significant advance here would be the night vision.

If the Vietnamese mobilized as much as 30 years ago, they would eventually win, because it would be a hell for the US to keep the territory, with many needed and vulnerable foot soldiers.

[Sandman]

The US would have at least as difficult a time, since the Vietnamese technology would also have advanced, and their population has almost doubled since the last Vietnam war. Can you hold down a country of 80 million?

[uh Clem]

No.

[Urban Ranger]

No. Just because you have better choppers doesn't mean they don't have portable SAM missiles. the tanks and APCs probably won't work too well in a jungle, either.

[Lancer]

Sandman, doubled! I'm amazed. Since when, '72 or earlier?

[Lancer]

UR, true, but we have better anti SAM missiles. They can remember the location of the SAM even after its radar has been turned off. Also, stealth could take them out before the choppers show up.

[Sandman]

It was 43 million in '72, now it's close to 80 million. It will certainly continue to rise for next thirty years, even as the Vietnamese government implements family planning measures.

It was 12 million in 1900, so it's multiplied by six during the twentieth century.

[Provost Harrison]

It's only a thin country, they'll all be falling off the edge before too long

It depends on your mission...if you want to level the country, sure, if you want to minimise civilian loss and conquer the country on the ground (as well as air support), you'd still be in for one hell of a rough time...

[Lancer]

Sandman, that's like the Philippines, but maybe even worse. In the Philippines there are children playing everywhere. It contrasts with suburban America or Europe so greatly as to be a bit of a shock at first. It's great to watch them play, but we brought a birthday cake in to grade school for a nephew, and the kids were almost fighting over getting a piece. It's become a culture of survival. Parents feel that the more kids they have the better chance that they have to an old age that is provided for. The way that we might look to our portfolio, they look to having alot of kids, and bear the cost of it themselves.

Down the street from us is a family that has 9 kids, the 10th is on the way. the eldest is getting ready for college and I am going to pay his way. That way he can pay for the next, etc...

I remember when I was a kid, a family by the name of Sullivan lived down the street. They had 12 kids. You don't see that anymore in the west.

Sorry, I always find these statistics fascinating, for what they mean to the world. An example is Israel. There will be more arabs living in Isreal than Isrealis within the next few years. In 20 years...Isreal will be bred out of existance. Amazing.

Sorry, ythis is my night to 'tie one on'.

[Lancer]

PH, yeah, I agree. One hell of a fight...but I think it would be just possible...

Maybe not with twice the people however. Sandman's stat is something to think on.

[Demerzel]

The US had a massive technology advantage in the Vietnam war and it did not help them much in the guerilla warfare they had to fight. So why should it help them more now?

You will only win a guerilla war if you get the general population on your side, as the British did in Malaya in the '50s. Destroying villages and ruining the livelihood of the villagers will only push them onto the enemies' side as happened in Vietnam. Note the section at the end on the way that we played & beat the guerillas at their own game

http://www.ausvets.com.au/malaya.htm

Although the British Army in Malaya at this time consisted of 11 battalions of British, Gurkha and Malay troops, the number of guerillas bearing arms outnumbered the actual fighting men of the British Army as most battalions were under strength. The Army's first task was a holding operation, keeping the guerillas on the move by constant searching, patrolling and ambushing.

Throughout the country there were some 600,000 squatters who lived on the fringes of the jungle on land to which they had no real title or right. The guerillas used these settlements as a refuge and to store food. The government decided to uproot and resettle these squatters in New Villages where they could be isolated from the guerillas. In these villages they were able to build their own houses and farm land that was to be legally theirs. By the end of 1951 more than two-thirds of the squatters were living in 509 New Villages. The guerillas were thus cut off from their usual food supplies and were forced to move.

At the same time a reward system was set up whereby persons giving information leading to the capture of guerillas were given cash bounties. This led many guerillas who had surrendered to give information on their former comrades.

Throughout the Emergency the Government maintained a policy of policing villages rather than destroying them and of "winning the hearts and minds" of the people. As a result, the Air Force rarely bombed or strafed targets near any town or populated area. Its vital contribution lay in air reconnaissance; dropping of supplies to Army units operating in jungles; evacuating casualties; and providing mobility for the Security forces with helicopters which were used very effectively to move troops from one point to another when searching out and subsequently attacking suspected camps.

1957-1960

Unlike the American policy in Vietnam of "search and destroy" and then return to base, the British and Commonwealth soldiers in Malaya played the guerillas at their own game by living out in the jungle for weeks on end and ambushing them. By 1953 these tactics had succeeded in forcing Chin Peng to move his headquarters into Thailand. He had not been able to establish any liberated areas and by the end of 1958 there were only 250 guerillas operating in Malaya.

In the end, the US might have won in Vietnam if they had employed the brute force tactic that the Chiefs of Staff wanted, i.e. have 10 US soldiers there for every guerrila, and if they had had freer rules of engagement. A limited campaign to defend a corrupt government was always going to fail though.

The ironic thing is that the US supported the French in their war in Vietnam with massive support under the Marshall Plan even though they knew that the French were hated there. If they had supported them with troops then the Vietnam war might not have had to happen.

http://www.plp.org/vietnam/vn2.html
"The enemy had much popular sympathy, and many civilians -aided them by providing both shelter and information. … guerrilla warfare work two ways; normally only one side can enjoy reliable citizen help...the French could not win the war because the internal political situation in Vietnam. … badly weakened their military position.

(Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, p. 373)

That quote would come back to haunt the US during its fight.

[Lancer]

Demerzel, a truly great post. I'll sleep on it. It'll be the last post I read before I call it a night.

Thanks!