[maica]

Much can be ascribed to the political cowardice of President Richard Nixon, who briefly set out to fight in Southeast Asia as we later would fight in Kuwait, but bowed down to pressure from student hoodlums and left-wing storm troopers. Had he proceeded militarily as planned, carpet-bombing Haiphong and closing its harbor, he would have cut off most of the North's war supplies.

When I asked many years ago why our forces did not close Haiphong Harbor, I was told that British ships used that port on a regular basis. Does any freeper know more about this? If it is true, then we have a perfect example of the hazards of deferring to 'allies.'

Could our 'allies' have been providing war materiel to the VC?

[leadpenny]

I was told that British ships used that port on a regular basis.

I remember that being talked about all during the war. Here again, if it was true, and we did not stop at least our allies from trading with the North, it falls back on the failure of LBJ. Nobody else.

[sneakypete]

Could our 'allies' have been providing war materiel to the VC?

I know the French were,and so were neutral countries like Sweden.

The reasons I heard to not bomb Haipong Harbor were because of the Russian and eastern European ships docked there. They were afraid of creating a "international incident".

[Chemnitz]

But Nixon quickly and easily closed Haiphong anyway, at the end of the war. Linebacker II and closing Haiphong ended the war. No one could ever understand how we could be so tough for moments and so weak the rest of the time.