Why Did the U.S. Lose the Vietnam War?
Why Did the U.S. Lose the Vietnam War?
Henry Kissinger signs the Paris Peace Accords on Jan. 27, 1973 in Paris. The war ended on April 30, 1975, when Saigon surrendered almost without fighting to the communist forces, ending the United States’ involvement in Vietnam.*
Photo by AFP/Getty Images
This question originally appeared on Quora , the best answer to any question. Ask a question, get a great answer. Learn from experts and access insider knowledge. You can follow Quora on Twitter , Facebook , and Google Plus .
Answer by Tony Morse , managing partner, Spatial Analysis Group:
Basically because the Vietnamese wanted to win more than the Americans did. There were a couple of reasons for this. First, the Americans were an invading force, and the Vietnamese were fighting on their own soil. Second, the Americans were not willing to make an all-out commitment to win.
The second item is interesting to me. I was in the U.S. Air Force in Thailand in 1971. I was talking with a forward air controller who was disgusted that the U.S. was not using nuclear weapons on Laos to stop the flow of supplies from North Vietnam to South Vietnam. I was incredulous and asked him why. His very matter-of-fact reply was that war is denying the enemy the use of the land and nothing did that better than nuclear weapons.
The irony is that had that pilot had his way America would have lost so much more that just the Vietnam War.
* * *
Answer by Jon Mixon , studied military actions from the Punic Wars to South Waziristan:
America “lost” South Vietnam because it was an artificial construct created in the wake of the French loss of Indochina. Because there never was an “organic” nation of South Vietnam, when the U.S. discontinued to invest military assets into that construct, it eventually ceased to exist.
Top Comment
The United States did everything it could to try to win the war EXCEPT invading the North. More...
-the_slasher14
Had the United States continued to prop up South Vietnamese government with military forces, it is conceivable that the entity could have continued into the 1980s, thus bringing it closer to when the Soviet Union collapsed and most communist nations in the world (China being a notable exception) ceased to exist. However, the American public had grown tired of the loss of American lives and of the war itself, meaning that there’s was no way that U.S. military involvement in the region could continue.
Also, had the United States launched a full-scale military invasion of North Vietnam instead of confining the war to the southern half of the country, the war would have largely ended in the mid- to late 1960s. There would have been some guerrilla actions for years and perhaps some incursions from Laos or Cambodia, but there would have been a unified Vietnam that was noncommunist.
However, that’s not how history went, and the brief fiction of South Vietnam and its eventually failure was the result.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2014/11/16/why_did_america_lose_the_vietnam_war.html
Tags
Who is online
587 visitors
Why did the U.S. lose the Vietnam War? It's a question I've thought about a number of times. Comments welcomed
Some say that it was the first war the US fought that was televised daily . The shocking images that the public saw nightly were enough to turn the US public against the war . The civilian public concluded that war really was hell ... big surprise!
Some say that it was the first war the US fought that was televised daily
Interesting point Petey. I never even thought of that but I definitely think you're on to something. Having it televised and public opinion becoming more and more anti war probably influenced the decisions by the politicians. I wonder how it would have turned out if the public wasn't privy to the atrocities of war. There's always collateral damage in war, it's just people don't want to know about it.
There are a number of reasons that we ''lost'' the war. From a military standpoint we did not lose, from an inept political and senior military command, we did.
Many Americans today believe that the Tet Offensive was a huge win for the NVA. Nothing could be further from the truth. The photos and film of the US Embassy with NVA in the court yard was a devastating view for Americans. In truth, once the US Military responded the NVA were close to be destroyed as a fighting force. But it was a huge propaganda victory for the NVA. The end was in sight for the US.
Leadership in many cases was inept at best. We changed our tactics and plans many times over the years. From seek and destroy, to body count etc.
The anti war movement, whether you agree with it or not, it did help bring the war to an end, and IMO saved many American lives. Their mistake was that they took it out on the government and the grunt on the line. Take it out on the government and the senior military, but the grunt on the ground wasn't fighting for flag, mom and apple pie, but simply to survive and for his buddies.
IMO, a general summation of Vietnam was that it as a cluster fuck from the git go and it was the grunt on the line that suffered the most.
One of the best books written on the war was ''A Bright and Shining Lie'' John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam. Written by Neil Sheehan.
Vietnam was the most divisive war in modern American history, and to this day invokes strong feeling.
My opinion comes from serving two tours in Nam.
All of us that were there, left a piece of ourselves and our blood there.
Currahee (We Stand Alone)
Thank you for your service Kav....
You guys paid a very dear price for some very lame politicians and their corporate allies.
Anybody that was with me knew not to take it out on the grunts, the troops didn't deserve it, the politicians did.
People were told that if they didn't want a mouthful of knuckles, don't be shouting shit like "Baby Killer" or "Jack Booted Thug" around me.
Do NOT denigrate our troops. THEY did NOT lose that damned war.
Yes, Tet was the final destruction of the Viet Cong as an organized field force, many believed that the North pushed the VC into that offensive to get them destroyed so they could politically take over the war. And the stilted media coverage did not do our troops any favors either.
I'm proud of my record as a Vietnam War Protestor, I feel I helped save many of our boys lives.
So did my father. (WWII/Korea combat vet, full duration for both) Even he spoke out against the war.
Kennedy had it right, it was THEIR war to win or lose. WE shouldn't have sent any combat troops over there.
That is why we lost, we were fighting their war for them, and micromanaging it from the Oval Office.
Not a way to win a war....
Leadership - lack thereof and morale - the loss of.
Was a helo gunner for 27 months (life expectancy 7 seconds (so I was told)) in the Northern provinces - Khe Sahn, Phu Bai, Quang Tri, Cua Viet and other vacation spots and we saw plenty of action with the NVA coming down the trails.
They "may" not have won in the South, but they sure as hell left an impact on the North. They had no qualms about lining Vietnamese citizens/villagers up and wiping them out, spilling terror left and right and all we could do, when allowed, was strafe, bomb and send our boys in to "curtail" the flow of blood.
As a Marine, I can truthfully say we had some of the greatest field officers in the world. But, their hands were totally tied. Often, during SITREP's, our daily op orders were countermanded by "direction" from the top, meaning Washington wanted specific targets that had nothing to do with the NVA forces and their mission of wipe and destroy.
I saw Major after Major after Colonel after Colonel go red in the face when the daily ops were changed based on a whim from over the big pond. No reason for it - none.
Came home, grateful to be alive and in one piece when so many of my buds weren't so fortunate. Marching down the main drag in Santa Anna, Cali, pelted with cabbage, eggs, apples, oranges, bottles - called baby killer, murderer from those young UCLA/USC/Pepperdine students kinda let the air out of our balloons. Got discharge and on the bus to the airport, we were accosted by more protesters. In the airport, we were pushed, shoved, spit on, called endless names.
Got on the flight to Memphis - the stewardesses placed us in vacant 1st Class seats and gave us, basically, royal treatment.
Went to the state employment office, gave them my DD-214 and was told - "Sorry, your military occupational career isn't beneficial for job selection. There's no openings for field machine gunners." - True statement. First five interviews was told point blank that they don't hire baby killers - please leave our offices because you disturb us.
Yeah - morale - loss of.
The anti war movement, whether you agree with it or not, it did help bring the war to an end, and IMO saved many American lives.
Kavika - don't you think that if the war had not been televised the generals would have had more discretion on how to fight and maybe it would have ended the war sooner? That strategy could have also saved more American lives. I don't want to take away the role of the anti war movement but it also placed a stigma on our military that fought as if they had a choice.
It makes me angry to hear that politicians were making military decisions and still are sticking their worthless two cents in. What's clear is that our government really hasn't changed all that much with respect to placing more value on public opinion so politicians can get re-elected rather than our military and our country. It sickens me.
Kavika - don't you think that if the war had not been televised the generals would have had more discretion on how to fight and maybe it would have ended the war sooner?
No I don't Pj. TV showed what a disaster our policies were, and the drumming coming from senior military and political that we were winning the war weren't correct.
Ever read "Dispatches" by Michael Herr? Herr recounts an incident that occurred while drinking and talking with a grunt. A LURP, if memory serves. Anyhow, Herr poses the question, "How can we win this war?" The grunt replies, "Put all the friendlies in junks in the south china sea. Nuke the country. Sink the boats."
It is highly recommended. It's right up there with Tim Obrien, Philip Caputo, John Del Vecchio, and so on.
Thank you. I'll definitely check out your recommendations and let you know what I think.
One of the good spins of a dirty business is the crew of incredible poet warriors who return and write of their experience.
The Viet Cong had a secret weapon: Jane Fonda.
Don't forget - and John McCain
''Don't forget - and John McCain''
???
His four confessions while a POW that were broadcast over Armed Forces Radio and others. "Supposedly", he sez he never made them, but, many vets said he did. There are even copies of the "confessions" in AFR's archives.
I don't agree with McCain's politics, but he did said that he did confess in an interview.
I'll refrain from passing judgment when he was badly injured, imprisoned and tortured.
Isn't the issue of such confessions depicted in the movie "Faith of Our Fathers"?