Perhaps another way to phrase the question is:
"Did the U.S. beat themselves in the Vietnam War?"
The answer is yes and no... Why?
Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. had more than enough military resources to defeat the NVA and Viet Cong at any time between 1965 and 1973. The U.S. and ARVN controlled almost all of South Vietnam by the time the U.S. pulled combat forces out of South Vietnam in 1973. The U.S. won every significant military battle during the Vietnam War - including the Tet Offense. The Viet Cong were destroyed as an effective military force after the Tet Offense and was reinforced by NVA regulars until the end of the War. All this and more can prove that the U.S. could have defeated the NVA and Viet Cong militarily.
The NVA and Viet Cong were using guerrilla warfare tactics, and such tactics don't necessarily win wars militarily. They maintained their resistance long enough that the larger forces grew weary of fighting any further and pulled out. This is a tactic that can be referenced from Sun Tzu's "Art of War". Such tactics were used with Afghanistan against the Soviet Union and the Americans against England.
Long story short - our military didn't lose the Vietnam War. Our politicians did. Therefore, we beat ourselves.
2007-06-11 13:07:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by MojaveDan 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Legally vietnam was NOT a war----it was always referred to as the "Vietnam CONFLICT" by the politicians of that time (LBJ for one)...this "conflict" began as a direct result of President Dwight D. Eisenhower sending in military advisors to Vietnam...it's the first place we should have stayed out of ---well maybe Korea too, since nothing really changed THERE either. I was a teenager and then a college student and then a young single working woman back during Vietnam---boys MY age were being sent there on a daily basis... and to what end? NOTHING....same as in Korea--a split country with communism in 1/2 and democracy in the other half. Iraq is sounding more and more like Vietnam every day----STUPID POLITICIANS sticking their noses in where they don't belong----we should have NEVER gone into Iraq because we entered under the false pretenses of finding Weapons of Mass destruction---(none were found)--THEN Uncle George changed it to an anti-terrorist "campaign", except a terrorist would have had to ATTACKED another country and at the time---even Sadam was staying home watching TV and not attacking ANYONE (except his own people inside Iraq)....then, we should have gotten out of there once we got Sadam...but we are still there and every day--AMERICAN men and women are getting killed and wounded for WHAT? I support our troops 100% but I do NOT support Mr. Bush and his reasons for staying in a country we have no business being IN. Oh what a tangled web we weave--Mr. Bush!!!!!
2007-06-10 16:57:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by LittleBarb 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Basically the answer is yes. The U.S. withdrew it's troops and the North Vietnamese took over South Vietnam. The city formerly known as Saigon is now called Ho Chi Minh city.
2007-06-10 16:26:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by sltmc 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Technically speaking the U.S.A. has not won a war since WW2,
It has however been involved in overt and covert conflicts, with disastrous consequences.
2007-06-10 16:29:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by izzie 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
No it was lost by stupid politicians, G Bush in Iraq is the same story over again.
2007-06-10 16:25:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
yes
2007-06-10 17:24:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
we didn't loose just kinda gave up
2007-06-14 09:54:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by cheri h 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
NO IT WAS NOT
2007-06-10 16:23:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by robert 1
·
0⤊
1⤋