In the early 1970s, were the USA wise to leave Vietnam, or would it have been better to have stayed longer?

Answer 1

Hello,

The Americans were wise to leave when they did. Judging from how quick the South collapsed after America layed back and the fiasco with the fall of Saigon I thought at that time, how can you help those who do not want to help themselves? Their hearts and minds were not into keeping their frail democracy.

Michael Kelly

Answer 2

Well considering that we were caught in someone else's war it was best to leave. The Domino effect we feared never occured(hindsight is 20/20) and all worked out better for us. If the U.S. HAD stayed all that would have happened would be more dead soldiers. There were only two real options. Leave, or change the way we conducted warfare. What it would have taken to win would have been ugly. The U.S. wouldn't take the measures they needed to take.
Oh and it is known that the Tet Offensive took more out of the NVA then it did out of the U.S. The U.S. as a COUNTRY never recovered psychologically and that was the NVA's PLAN. They knew all they had to do was keep sending home bodies and EVENTUALLY the people would FORCE the President to withdraw the troops. So they just had to let some more die. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few as the old saying goes. Truth be told we could have won if America would have recognized that their troops were dying in higher numbers and they were just waiting us out. Although IF the U.S. had recognized that the NVA would have surrendered.

Answer 3

Me again - the nasty one.
Hello Michael.
We HAD to get out of Viet Nam - whether we should have ever gotten involved in the first place is an entirely different question and then, of course, all the political machinations that took place to KEEP us there are too numerous to mention (and WE will never know the half of them.)
The War we are currently engaged in is eerily reminiscent of Viet Nam vis a vis comments made by others as to the determination and willingness to fight for themselves not evidenced by the South Vietnamese. (Substitute Iraqis.)
What is different is we ate dinner listening to the "body counts" and were actually allowed to see that which was going on, such as soldiers' flag draped caskets being returned to their families.
We were involved in Viet Nam before I was born and didn't get out until I graduated from High School. My friends lost fathers and brothers and, had the War continued, my brother would probably have been drafted. My Dad, WWII Vet, actually muttered once that if that time came we would simply drive across the bridge and not come back until the War was over. And he was extremely patriotic. I remember the exact time and place he said it I was so startled.
A poignant reminder of that entire war can be found in the movie "We Were Soldiers..." when the North Vietnamese General places the American flag back on the fence after that horrible battle and makes a comment to the effect that we didn't have a clue as to what we were getting into and all that would result from our involvement would be thousands more dead - both American and Vietnamese.
We should have learned a lesson from the French and stayed out. But - hindsight is 20/20.
Sorry for rambling...

Answer 4

The South Vietnamese were trained to fight the American way- with masses of technology and firepower. But after 1973 the US cut economic aid so the ARVN had to fight without heavy support- but don't let facts stop contributors from re-writing their history to blame others for their defeat, and their letting down an ally that they manufactured in the first place.

The war cost the US too much- the economic stagnation lasted until the 80s. Yes, there were other causes, but the cost of Vietnam was a large contributor. And the war could not have been 'won' because US strategy was faulty.

Answer 5

If we get past the "we never should have gone" attitude and accept the fact they were there, then when they left was not a moment too soon. However, if you look into the way that war was executed by the US government, it becomes pretty obvious that the problem was much deeper than just when to leave. They never really let the military carry out the war as it should have been. There were all kinds of limitations placed in the rules of engagement. As a result, they could never win, they could only achieve a stalemate at best. And eventually a stalemate wasn't good enough.

Answer 6

After thousands of U.S. casualties and billions of dollars spent in military aid, the South Vietnamese army was not able to hold its own against the North. We did not have the option of staying longer. South Vietnam collapsed.

Answer 7

These children on here who defame the men and women who died, not their choice, should have to spend a few months getting shot at. Then they would not say such idiotic things as they do. For their information, we won every major battle, and Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon lost the war.
Enough of that. If memory serves me correctly we Did get out in the early 70's. If Kennedy could have been shot a few months earlier, we probably never would have been there to begin with.

Answer 8

It was a neccesity to pull out of Vietnam,in hindsight, the country was falling apart, there was no reasonable expectation of peaceful settlement or victory.

Answer 9

We had already sacrificed so much and tried so hard that to throw any more money, supplies, or lives into trying to save a country that could not/would not fight for themselves was a waste. We were right to withdraw when we did. China never would have let us win.

Answer 10

Hey Cyc: The Americans got out by the skin of their teeth. If they had stayed 10 minutes longer they'd have been locked up in prison camps, never to be seen again.