why did britain not support the united states with a contingent of combat troops during the vietnam conflict?

Answer 1

Further to previous answers, we most definitely WERE asked. On a number of occasions between 1964 and 1968, members of Lyndon Johnson's administration made informal requests to their British counterparts for even a token comitment of forces, in order to show the the UK supported the US stance politically. The British answer was always the same: no commitment of forces to Vietnam (although we had had a detachment of Royal Engineers in Laos in 1963-64 engaged on building airfields in what was known as Operation CROWN).

The reasons for this were varied, but boiled down to the fact that the British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, disliked the American war in Vietnam (although he shared their views on the need to combat Communist-backed military insurgents), and was unwilling to commit British forces to what could rapidly become an open-ended commitment. The UK was already engaged on active military operations in Borneo (1962-66) and, Aden (1964-67), as well as having large forces in Cyprus and Malaya and the British Army of The Rhine in Germany. All of this was a serious drain on the exchequer, and the British economy was already experiencing difficulties in 1965, leading ultimately to a devaluation of the pound in 1967. With economic difficulties becoming sharper in 1966, the Wilson Government initiated a series of defence reveiws which, between 1966 and 1968, led to the abandonment of Britian's position 'east of Suez' and the scrapping of much of the Royal Navy's carrier force. This followed the abandonment in 1965 of British plans for an independent nuclear deterrent and for a multi-roled Tactical Strike and Reconnaissance aircraft (TSR).

Therefore, the whole thrust of British defence policy in the mid and late 1960's was towards retrenchment, and 'pulling in the horns'. By the early 1970s, the primary focus was on NATO's Central Front, and BAOR in Germany. Therefore, Wilson sought to avoid extending Britain's military commitments outside Europe. Added to which, US involvement in Vietnam was unpopular in the UK, and the Wilson Government was keen to avoid further unpopularity, particularly after 1966 when the economic downturn became more evident.

Basically - too expensive, too unpopular, and totally out of step with British defence policy. THAT's why we didn't get involved in Vietnam.

Answer 2

The Brits were there fighting after the second world war with the Japanese as allies !! (war is insane) Britain pulled out and left the French to fight on. The French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu and also withdrew. Years later the USA started supplying 'military advisors' and then they escalated their position to a full blown war. They should have learnt the lesson that people fight harder when defending their country than when the troops are merely fighting for some political gain by politicians thousands of miles away

Answer 3

The American assault into Vietnam & Cambodia & Laos was illegal. Just as the current debauchle in Iraq.

The USA conjured up an excuse, just like UK/US over Iraq. Two American destroyers were supposedly attacked by Vietnamese gunboats. August 1964.

This gave President Lyndon Johnston/White House the excuse to produce the Gulf of Tonking Resolution. Effectively kicking off Americas illegal attack. And the deaths of millions of Vietnamese, Cambodians & Laotians.

Britian did not get involve directly with this war. But Her Majesty's Australian Forces did, being a member of the Commonwealth.

Answer 4

Because the Labour prime minister of that time, Harold Wilson, refused LBJ's request for troops. The French had already been kicked out of the region the previous decade. In military terms, victory was already unattainable. Not everybody shared Washington's view on the Domino Theory either.

Those were the days, when a British prime minister didn't feel obliged to join in America's latest war. Kinda miss them.

Answer 5

So far only JimHist, has a good answer. The rest of you need to lose the political BS......

The UK rather busy in the 1960's with other things. The operations in Borneo, Aden, The need to support NATO in Europe, The pullback from Africa. Major force cutbacks in defense budgets also kept them out. However, major allies like Australia, South Korea, Philippines did Help the US greatly.

Answer 6

if I remember correctly there was an argument over the strategy,
the Americans in Brita ins oppinion had what we thaught was a very bad strategy, the strategy was to have a seek out and destroy policy, The British on the outher hand wanted a seek out and hold policy, The American way bomb them out and go elswere, but they would come back again. The British having succesfuly used the seek out and hold policy with the mau mau
some years before seek out and hold is when you capture a place and stay there and live with them pushing forward and staying untill the enemy is pushed out of the land. thats why they fell out about it, we dont know if the Brit strategy would have worked or not as far as i know it was not tried.

Answer 7

LBJ asked Wilson to send a Brigade of Guards as an act of support.
Wilson, quiet rightly, told him to get stuffed!
The Aussies were there, my Brother one of them, The SAS did support, covertly. But even the Yanks could not hold onto it!
And they knock the French! Remember Dien Bien Phu?

Answer 8

a million out of each 4 Christians on the earth are Catholic. in spite of the indisputable fact that the Catholic Church has changed by the years, clone of the numbers have. some Catholic churches are historic type, and some are better contemporary-day and lenient. it truly is why a lot human beings brake off into Protestant churches. As for the "no faith" human beings, some human beings that think in God pick to no longer call it a "faith". have you ever heard the conserving "Jesus is my savior. no longer my faith." It oftentimes way worship God the perfect way the bible says to, no longer the perfect way guy-made non secular businesses allow you to recognize to. As for the atheist, better human beings are installation too smart, and thinking technologies is the authentic component to the total component.

Answer 9

We started there as an obligation to the French- even though we had promised Ho Chi Mihn independence for his country for their help in WWII
Seems we were not that set in advancing US interest there till oil was found in the Delta
when the oil ran out, so did we!

Answer 10

The war was mostly pointless and did not suceed in doing any good. The US troops significantly outnumbered their opponents anyway in terms of resources and firepower.