The War We Could Have Won [Truth on 'Nam published in NY Times!]

The New York Times ^ | May 1, 2005 | By STEPHEN J. MORRIS

[aculeus]

THE Vietnam War is universally regarded as a disaster for what it did to the American and Vietnamese people. However, 30 years after the war's end, the reasons for its outcome remain a matter of dispute.

The most popular explanation among historians and journalists is that the defeat was a result of American policy makers' cold-war-driven misunderstanding of North Vietnam's leaders as dangerous Communists. In truth, they argue, we were fighting a nationalist movement with great popular support. In this view, "our side," South Vietnam, was a creation of foreigners and led by a corrupt urban elite with no popular roots. Hence it could never prevail, not even with a half-million American troops, making the war "unwinnable."

This simple explanation is repudiated by powerful historical evidence, both old and new. Its proponents mistakenly base their conclusions on the situation in Vietnam during the 1950's and early 1960's and ignore the changing course of the war (notably, the increasing success of President Richard Nixon's Vietnamization strategy) and the evolution of South Vietnamese society (in particular the introduction of agrarian reforms).

For all the claims of popular support for the Vietcong insurgency, far more South Vietnamese peasants fought on the side of Saigon than on the side of Hanoi. The Vietcong were basically defeated by the beginning of 1972, which is why the North Vietnamese launched a huge conventional offensive at the end of March that year. During the Easter Offensive of 1972 - at the time the biggest campaign of the war - the South Vietnamese Army was able to hold onto every one of the 44 provincial capitals except Quang Tri, which it regained a few months later. The South Vietnamese relied on American air support during that offensive.

If the United States had provided that level of support in 1975, when South Vietnam collapsed in the face of another North Vietnamese offensive, the outcome might have been at least the same as in 1972. But intense lobbying of Congress by the antiwar movement, especially in the context of the Watergate scandal, helped to drive cutbacks of American aid in 1974. Combined with the impact of the world oil crisis and inflation of 1973-74, the results were devastating for the south. As the triumphant North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Van Tien Dung, wrote later, President Nguyen Van Thieu of South Vietnam was forced to fight "a poor man's war."

Even Hanoi's main patron, the Soviet Union, was convinced that a North Vietnamese military victory was highly unlikely. Evidence from Soviet Communist Party archives suggests that, until 1974, Soviet military intelligence analysts and diplomats never believed that the North Vietnamese would be victorious on the battlefield. Only political and diplomatic efforts could succeed. Moscow thought that the South Vietnamese government was strong enough to defend itself with a continuation of American logistical support. The former Soviet chargé d'affaires in Hanoi during the 1970's told me in Moscow in late 1993 that if one looked at the balance of forces, one could not predict that the South would be defeated. Until 1975, Moscow was not only impressed by American military power and political will, it also clearly had no desire to go to war with the United States over Vietnam. But after 1975, Soviet fear of the United States dissipated.

During the war the Soviets despised their North Vietnamese "friends" (the term of confidential bureaucratic reference, rather than "comrades"). Indeed, Henry A. Kissinger's accounts of his dealings, as Nixon's national security adviser, with President Thieu are models of respect when compared with the bitter Soviet accounts of their difficulties with their counterparts.

In secret internal reports, Hanoi-based Soviet diplomats regularly complained about the deceitfulness of the North Vietnamese, who concealed strategic planning from their more powerful patron. In a 1972 report to Moscow, the Soviet ambassador even complained that although Marshal Pavel Batitsky, commander of the Soviet Air Defense Forces, had visited Hanoi earlier that year and completed a major military aid agreement, North Vietnamese leaders did not inform him of the imminent launch date of their Easter Offensive.

What is also clear from Soviet archival sources is that those who believed that North Vietnam had more than national unification on its mind were right: Its leaders were imbued with a sense of their ideological mission - not only to unify Vietnam under Communist Party rule, but also to support the victory of Communists in other nations. They saw themselves as the outpost of world revolution in Southeast Asia and desired to help Communists in Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and elsewhere.

Soviet archives show that after the war ended in 1975, with American power in retreat, Hanoi used part of its captured American arsenal to support Communist revolutions around the world. In 1980 some of these weapons were shipped via Cuba to El Salvador. This dimension of Vietnamese behavior derived from a deep commitment to the messianic internationalism of Marxist-Leninist ideology.

Vietnam today is not the North Vietnam of 1955, 1965 or 1975. Like post-Mao China it has retreated from totalitarianism to authoritarianism. It has reformed its economy and its foreign policy to become more integrated into the world. But those changes were not inevitable and would not necessarily have occurred had Mikhail Gorbachev not ascended to power in Moscow, and had the Soviet Union and its empire not collapsed. Nor would these changes necessarily have occurred had China not provided a new cultural model for Vietnam to follow, as it has for centuries.

Precisely because Vietnam has changed for the better, we need to recognize what a profoundly ideological and aggressive totalitarian regime we faced three, four and five decades ago. And out of respect for the evidence of history, we need to recognize what happened in the 1970's and why.

In 1974-75, the United States snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Hundreds of thousands of our Vietnamese allies were incarcerated, and more than a million driven into exile. The awesome image of the United States was diminished, and its enemies were thereby emboldened, drawing the United States into new conflicts by proxy in Afghanistan, Africa and Latin America. And the bitterness of so many American war veterans, who saw their sacrifices so casually demeaned and unnecessarily squandered, haunts American society and political life to this day.

Stephen J. Morris, a fellow at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, is writing a book on the Vietnam War in the Nixon years.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[Morgan in Denver]

Agreed, as should many in the press corps, and the MSM today.

[yarddog]

I remember all too well the aftermath of JFK. Incredibly, the fact that the assassin was a Communist supporter of Castro seemed to be of no import.

It was blamed on conservatives, White Southerners, and gun nuts. Oddly enough, it still is to some degree.

Actually, Lee Harvey Oswald technically was a White Southerner but with a world view exactly the opposite of most.

[jslade]

I was a radar navigator on B-52s during the late 60's-early 70's. We could have won the war in two week or so. By bombing the dike systems on the Red River during monsoon season, North Vietnam would have been under water. Game over!

[armymarinemom]

Ping

[traviskicks]

From:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/kerryvietnam.htm

Prior to 1975 the North Vietnamese Communists had already killed between 50,000-100,000 of their own citizens in purges, terrors and 'land reforms'. (3) Upon reuniting their country, the North Vietnamese killed or sent to labor camps hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese citizens. Millions of refugees have since fled Vietnam. Known as 'the boat people', they sought refuge wherever they could. At least 100,000 people drowned fleeing the Communists. Others were attacked by pirates, or were repatriated to the hellish labor camps of Vietnam. Today, over 1.2 million South Vietnamese refugees live in the United States. Yet Kerry seemed to believe the primary threat to the Vietnamese people was that posed by the armed forces of the United States.

In December 1975, just months after Saigon fell, the government of neighboring Laos fell to a Vietnamese backed Communist force. Hundreds of thousands were killed in war, famine and political assassination (3). The Hmong tribespeople, loyal American allies before the pullout, were decimated, an estimated ten per cent of them were killed by Communist forces. (6)

On April 17th, 1975 the Khmer Rouge, a Communist guerrilla group led by Pol Pot, overthrew the US backed government (weakened by the US withdrawal) with the help of the North Vietnamese government and China. They forced all city dwellers into the countryside and to labor camps. During their rule, it is estimated that 2 million Cambodians died by starvation, torture or execution. 2 million Cambodians represented approximately 30% of the Cambodian population during that time. (7)

In sum, the American withdrawal left over 3 million dead and caused millions more to flee their homes. Today South East Asia is still impoverished and undemocratic. Growing up, we are taught that the 'domino effect' was a foolish, flawed theory. In reality, it was a perfect predictor of what came to pass. South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia fell to the Communists within a year. Burma battled Communists insurgencies, even while embarking on an even harsher form of socialism that starved it's population. Communist insurgencies, although not ultimately successful, increased in intensity in Thailand. It's possible that Communism could have spread even further and the insurgencies been more successful if the newly formed Communist nations hadn't turned on each other in another orgy of violence.

As these events unfolded, America suffered a terrible weakening of our national pride and our moral leadership in the world was shaken. We were not defeated on the battlefield, we were defeated by weak national leadership and by public opinion here at home.




From http://www.neoperspectives.com/kerryconclusion.htm

Communism is the greatest evil that man has ever known. It is responsible for more than 100 millions deaths (more than all the wars in history combined), millions and millions of refugees and the subjugation and slavery of over 2 billion people since WWII. Communist regimes always follow a similar pattern. A Communist regime has never been elected, so first Communists must orchestrate a revolution, often with the support of funding from preexisting Communist regime. Next, Communists dissolve private property, nationalize media and begin a brutal purge of political prisoners and the upper classes. To conduct it's class warfare and maintain control of the revolting people, the state will militarize, establish a large secret police presence, and create horrific labor/reeducation camps. The economy collapses, failed farm policies result in starvation, refugees flee, and the government begins to export Communist revolution abroad. How far the government is willing to push the Communist philosophy will directly equate with the severity of these events and the suffering of their people. This exact pattern has come to pass in the Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, North Korea, Angola, Eastern Europe, Yugoslavia, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Cuba. A few countries on this list have not experienced the true hell of Communism because the governments either didn't last long enough to take full root, or total Communist policies were not pursued in earnest. (67)

[TX Bluebonnet]

read later

[shrinkermd]

"The Congressional Dems cutoff of financial aid to our allies was disgraceful and unforgivable.

Yes, Yes and Yes. What was even worse they had to make the sacrifice of so many of my friends meaningless and continue to do so. Traitors through and through.

[Morgan in Denver]

Yep, I did. I've been around that long but don't let it out. Heck, I even wore an "I Like Ike" button once upon a time.

[Rembrandt_fan]

Oh, now the NYT figures it out. Decades after the fact, of course. Thanks. Thanks a lot.

[AZHua87]

ping

[Tacis]

Why would ANYONE believe that, after 30 years of doing exactly the opposite, the NYT would start printing the truth about Viet Nam?

[hosepipe]

And Jane Fonda and and John Scary are still allowed to run amuck, as if, they were not foreign agents, then AND NOW..

[Da Mav]

The war in Vietnam was not a victory for the communists as many seem to claim these days. While it is true that South Vietnam was invaded and conquered, the main rationale for the war was to prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia, including Indonesia, the Phillipines and ultimately Japan. That did not happen, in large measure because of the price that we forced the communists to pay for Vietnam.

The role of the "antiwar" left in America was the prolongation of the war. After the Tet offensive the VC was smashed and the North had to decide whether to take over the offensive. Their decision was based primarily on the hope for victory that the "antiwar" movement in America gave them. General Giap says as much in his book.

The left was responsible for the bloodiest years of the war, for the American withdrawal, the American "no win" policy, and ultimately the starvation of South Vietnam's military. They got their victory in country. But looking at the larger picture, communism did not spread to region. American lives lost in Vietnam stopped the dominoes from falling. For that the free world owes our Vietnam vets a great debt.

The challenge at the present is Iraq. Once again, in the name of "peace", the left is howling for an American defeat. If we are forced out of Iraq before a blocking regime is set up the Middle East the dominoes will fall. Islamofascism is the new ideology which threatens the world. Just as our parents and grandparents defeated Nazi fascism and Communist oppression, we must defeat Islamofascism or our children will pay a price.

I'd say its time for some national parades and ceremonies thanking those who are making the sacrifice for future generations.

[Verginius Rufus]

The "killing fields" were in Cambodia, where the Khmer Rouge killed between one and two million people during their few years in power. I was asking about the death toll in South Vietnam following the Communist victory on 4/30/1975.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

If Nixon hadn't caved into the minority anti-war crowd
and listened to the Silent Majority
Hanoi Jane AND Hanoi Kerry
would have been prosecuted for their treason in the 70's,
while Nixon was still President.

Keep in mind that Nixon was directly involved in Viet Nam,
as Vice President, going back to at least 1955.


26 Sep 1945 - The first death of an American serviceman in Vietnam occurred.
OSS (Office of Special Operations) Major (Lieutenant Colonel) A. Peter Dewey
was killed in action by the Communist Vietminh near Hanoi.
May 1950 President Harry S Truman authorised $10 million in aid to the French for their war in Viet Nam.
By January 1951, $150 million had been given in aid.
1953-61 Dwight D. Eisenhower 34th US President
1953-61 Richard M. Nixon Vice President
1953 - The US is supporting the French in the amount of $1 billion per year--
33% of all US foreign aid--which is 80% of the total cost to the
. US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles (under Eisenhower) first voices the 'Domino Theory':
if one country in Southeast Asia falls to the Communists, they will all fall, one by one.

12 Feb 55 - President Eisenhower's administration sends 1st 350 U.S. advisers to South Vietnam
to train the South Vietnamese Army

8 Jun 56 - The first American of record to die in Vietnam
was Air Force Tech Sergeant Richard B. Fitzgibbon Jr.
His son, Richard B. Fitzgibbon III, died in Vietnam Sep 7, 1965.
8 Jun 56 Has been formally recognized by the Pentagon as the first American officially to die in that war.

5 Sep 56 - President Eisenhower tells a news conference that the French are
"involved in a hopelessly losing war in Indochina" 1956 The US believed in that Ho Chi Minh would have won any election held in Viet Nam and used their influence over the government of the State of Viet Nam to ensure that the election was not held



From a Must Visit Site
Vipers Vietnam Veterans Page, A Vietnam Veteran & Proud Web Site
About Vietnam

The Vietnam war was the longest in our nation's history.
1st American advisor was killed on June 08, 1956,
and the last casualties in connection with the war occurred on May 15, 1975, during the Mayaquez incident. Approximately 2.7 million Americans served in the war zone; 300,000 were wounded and approximately 75,000 permanently disabled. Officially there are still 1,991 Americans unaccounted for from SE Asia.

Vietnam was a savage, in your face war where death could and did strike from anywhere with absolutely no warning. The brave young men and women who fought that war paid an awful price of blood, pain and suffering. As it is said: "ALL GAVE SOME ... SOME GAVE ALL"
The Vietnam war was not lost on the battlefield. No American force in ANY other conflict fought with more determination or sheer courage than the Vietnam Veteran.  For the first time in our history America sent it's young men and women into a war run by inept politicians who had no grasp of military strategies and no moral will to win. They were led by "top brass" who were concerned mainly with furthering their own careers, most neither understood the nature of the war nor had a clue about the impossible mission with which they'd tasked their soldiers.  And the war was reported by a self serving Media who penned stories filled with inaccuracies, deliberate omissions, biased presentations and blatant distorted interpretations because they were more interested in a story than the truth! It can be debated that we should never have fought that war. It can also be argued that the young Americans who fought so courageously, never losing a single major battle, helped in a huge way to WIN THE COLD WAR.

[Stretch]

Stretch: The old Geezer here again.... Remember, folks, it was John F. Kennedy, and his CIA who plotted to kill the leader DIEM, and succeeded, that started the war in Viet Nam. After Johnson was defeated, they worked to bring down Nixon, and placed a lot of the blame for the war on him. Remember, also,....That Hillary was on the impreachment committee and was the main demagog of Nixon that caused him to resign by placing illegal restrictions to keep him from defending himself in the impeachment hearings..... HITLERY WAS VILE THEN AND IS TO THIS DAY.... ONLY SO MUCH WORSE. THE EVIL ONE GREW FROM HER DAYS WHEN SHE DEFENDED THE "BLACK pANTHERS"... EVIL, EVIL, EVIL!!!

[risk]

Thanks, Tonk.

[Stretch]

Stretch: The old Geezer here again.... Remember, folks, it was John F. Kennedy, and his CIA who plotted to kill the leader DIEM, and succeeded, that started the war in Viet Nam. After Johnson was defeated, they worked to bring down Nixon, and placed a lot of the blame for the war on him. Remember, also,....That Hillary was on the impreachment committee and was the main demagog of Nixon that caused him to resign by placing illegal restrictions to keep him from defending himself in the impeachment hearings..... HITLERY WAS VILE THEN AND IS TO THIS DAY.... ONLY SO MUCH WORSE. THE EVIL ONE GREW FROM HER DAYS WHEN SHE DEFENDED THE "BLACK pANTHERS"... EVIL, EVIL, EVIL!!!