Do you think America would've won the Vietnam War if the troops weren't withdrawn? Why or why not?

Answer 1

No. That was a political war, it wasn't supposed to be won. We had all the fire power, the troops & kicked their butts but weren't allowed to do anything. Killed thousands of our troops & when they came home, they were spit on & called baby killers. If you really want an inkling, go to DC & visit the Wall. Go at night. If you have any feelings, it will humble you.

Answer 2

No. If we want a war to be won, we have to unleash the military to do the job the right way, free of politicians telling the army how to make war. Just give them an objective and say, "go get it done."

Vietnam was a tough place to fight, too often the enemy was all around us as normal looking as a South Vietnamese person. We just should not have been there unless we allowed the military to do the job the way it should have been done. Wipe out the military in the north, and get out after a period of no more then 2 years. Still, it would not have happened as China would have most likely done what they did in Korea. Our best options were to not have gone in at all.

Answer 3

President Johnson did not trust the field commanders to make the call as to what a viable target was and was not. To the extent that he demanded to make the final call himself. McNamara knew at that point that it was a lost cause. And when Johnson himself realized just how badly he'd screwed the pooch announced that he would not run for re-election. So many lives wasted. And for what? Nixon came in and tried to salvage the situation but he too realized that it was a lost cause.
Define "Win." Militarily, we probably could have won. We had the extreme advantage in technology. But we lost out to a stinking bicycle strapped with materiel. Go figure. Perhaps if we'd been "Allowed" to bomb uncle Ho's trail. You can't fight a war with both hands tied behind your back and expect to win. With the exception of Japan, the U.S. has never successfully exported democracy. Germany had assistance from Great Britain and France as well as the U.S..

Answer 4

We won every battle we ever fought in Vietnam. We fought until the Congress of the United States was worried that they might not get reelected if the war continued. Congress cut off the money and the war was ended not with a bang but with a whimper. Kissinger gave it all away at the negotiation table. We actually won the battles but lost the war because of politics. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt that said "Southeast Asia War Games, Silver Medal".

Answer 5

It wasn't whether or not the troops were withdrawn. It was whether the politicians would get their sticky fingers out of calling the shots.
If it was a war run by generals I think we would of won. But it was a war run by politicians may have been involved in the JFK conspiracy, and had no knowledge or ability to win a war.

Answer 6

1) If we lose Viet Nam, The rest of south east Asia will fall into USSR's hands like dominos. Biggest lie fed to tjhe American Public until 9/11.

2) We left and the USSR is gone. We lost??

3) Wherer were the Vietnamese going to go? The people of the south supported the troops of the north. If we were still there, we may have disappeared instead of the USSR.

4) All the economic flack that Carter took was the result of the debt Nixon (Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower) ran up fighting that fiasco.

5) Why are we in Iraq?

Answer 7

there is no way, it simply wasn't meant to be. this is obvious because the war was as unpopular as the present day war, and America is losing the little support that it had to begin with, little by little. Not only does this cost the U.S. military it's morale, but it strengthens the "enemy". There is no chance that the present war can be "won" either. The "enemy" is never going to expire, there are new "enemies coming out of the woodworks each day. There is no reasonably good solution to be found by means of violence, intimidation, or coercion. This is a childish reaction to such a problem.

Answer 8

Same as French, It would have been stalemate that kept going till costs could not be absorbed any more or distraction helping with full creation on OPEC wasn't needed. See if your library has PBS Series on Vietnam to learn pressure applied by Russia and China.

Answer 9

Vietnam, like Iraq, was not a "winnable" war. The only way to have "won" would have been to bomb abd bomb and bomb until every single last Vietnamese citizen, North and South alike, were dead. Every Laotian and Cambodian too. Only if the entire country were a smoking ruin and not even the cockroaches were alive would we have been able to claim any kind of traditional "victory". Iraq is no different. I didn't understand the comparison in 2003. Now I do. I thank George Bush for the civics and history lessons...

Answer 10

There was an operation plan called "Operation Tiger Claw". It envisioned landing a reinforced regiment of Marines at a place called Dong Hoi in North Vietnam, seizing the airfield and using it to prosecute further operations by the remainder of the Marine force against Hanoi and Haiphong. It would have cut off all lines between North and South Vietnam and brought the North Vietnamese to the peace table. Total estimated length of time to complete the operation would have been six weeks. Total loss lof life would have been in the range of 4,000 dead.
Seven times that plan was presented to President Johnson for his order to execute it. After he turned it down for the last time, every ranking Admiral in the Navy and General in the Marine Corps retired within 30 days of each other.
Tiger Claw would have worked. We would have defeated the North Vietnamese and cut off any support they could have provided to the Viet Cong in the South. I know. I helped write the Medical Support Annex of Tiger Claw in 1964, when it was merely a contingency plan.