Was it inevitable that the US lost the Vietnam war?

[Lancer]

How did the US lose, and how might we have won?

I think we lost because we wouldn't invade North Vietnam, and we could have won by doing so.

1) Leave the countryside in the hands of the ARVN and consentrate all US forces, except the marines, south of the DMZ.

2) Drive across the DMZ. The NVA will come south to meet the attack. The consentration of NVA will present many targets for tactical and strategic air attack. Perhaps this will also lessen pressure on the ARVN as well.

3) When the NVA come south, the marines do an end around and land behind them supported by naval gunfire, carrier and ground based air.

4) Hit from the north and south, by tactical and strategic airpower and naval gunfire, the NVA would be defeated. Then the US forces drive on Hanoi against whatever remains.

5) The VC would wither on the vine without the support of North Vietnam.

[JohnT]

The US lost because the political will to do what was necessary to achieve victory wasn't there.

It wasn't there because there were no clear determination of what "victory" meant.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

we lost cuz the commanders on the ground were dumbasses who didnt follow the vietnam primer written by col. hackworth. enough said. no one understood how to fight, or win, without taking casualties.

[BeBMan]

But other nations have people too

[Lawrence of Arabia]

i disagree. we sure did a number against the native americans. and so did the spaniards.

[Lancer]

"The US lost because the political will to do what was necessary to achieve victory wasn't there."

An all out US invasion of the North would have ended it alot quicker than it actually ended. It wasn't the people that were weak, at least not in the early and middle stages, it was the leadership. Johnson lacked the nerve to make the tough choices, roll the dice.

[Lancer]

"we lost cuz the commanders on the ground were dumbasses who didnt follow the vietnam primer written by col. hackworth. enough said. no one understood how to fight, or win, without taking casualties."

We lost because we never tried to win.

[Tassadar500]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


But they dont have the people (always lowercase).

You are correct. Rich people can always dominate the masses.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

We lost because we never tried to win.

when youre in country for what, 10 years, you cant say we never tried to win.

[Lancer]

The politicians never let the military do what it needed to do to win. We were sending our guys out hoping someone would shoot at them, so that we could shoot back. That's not strategy, that's insanity.

[Dis]

Colonel Kurtz could have won it.

[Ted Striker]

Not deploying Ted Striker = total loss

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Lancer
The politicians never let the military do what it needed to do to win. We were sending our guys out hoping someone would shoot at them, so that we could shoot back. That's not strategy, that's insanity.

The history will rather say : the political purpose of the war was to protect the South Vietnam, without invading the NV; the military did not challenge the validity of this mission; they only ask for a large expeditionary army, including a total air domination, and they obtained it. If the military discovered too late that they could not protect the SV without invading NV, it is not a political failure. The political failure was to wait 10 years before recognizing that the military had failed from the beginning.

There was also a military failure on the grand tactic point of view. The defense is normally easier than the attack; this is even more true with an absolute air domination.

[Dis]

after chinese intervention in the Korean war, I don't think anyone supported a takeover of N. Vietnam. And even then I don't think we could have won if we had occupied the whole country.

And the chinese would have kicked our asses again had they got involved.

[Pekka]

I think it was going to happen one way or the other anyway. What you have in there is the defendors dream and the locals weren't exactly pussies but pretty tough folks.

Troops fought well, but they were on a mission that couldn't be won IMO. Then again, we have a lot of those 'US could take over the world militarily few times over' and those folks are being ****ing serious .. anyway if you ask me, Vietnam was not about to be taken by anyone else except NV, period. It was their domain. Even though US troopers took and won the battles, it wasn't a war to be won, it turned out.