Ok, i have spoke to my dad about this war countless times and it seem that he does know what happened but his way of explaining doesnt seem to get into my brain very well.

I would be very greatfull if someone could explain - why this war began and what happened at the end.

Thankyou.

Peace Renegade,

I can't tell you everything, but I can give you some insight.

We took over fighting the Viet Cong from the French shortly after the Korean War, it was supposedly all to defeat the 'communist influence' in that region of Asia. Viet Nam was a French Colony up till then.

In the beginning it was just supposed to be advisors telling the South Viet Nam military how to defeat the revolutionaries. From there it went to supplies and material, then troops, then a shitload of troops, then one day everybody realized that it had shifted from a South 'Nam vs North 'Nam fight to a US Military vs Russian/Chinese supplied communist forces total fiasco.

Then about 1967 it started going very badly downhill, too many guys getting killed for what? Then came the Tet Offensive, and it appeared we were caught flat-footed and totally dumbfounded. Nixon swore he wasn't going to be the President who lost the only war the US would ever lose so he escalated everything, bombing Hanoi and mining the harbor, going into Laos and Cambodia, leaning on 'Uncle Ho' real hard so they would come to the 'peace table' so he could bail out and save his ass.

Then about 1971 he started selling the idea about getting the US out of the war, "Vietnamizing the war" he called it, what it really was you could call the "give the South 'Nam military a bunch of guns and ammo and say "see-ya". Then in the end it just all went bad, those last few days watching all those people who would hang on to the undercarriage of planes and choppers just to get out, it was bad to see.

If your father doesn't tell you about being there, he is doing you a favor. There are stories in his head that would make you shit your pants, just don't ask. If the day ever comes that he wants to talk about those days, he'll let you know, until then just let the demon sleep.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Global Dominator:
Then came the Tet Offensive, and it appeared we were caught flat-footed and totally dumbfounded. Nixon swore he wasn't going to be the President who lost the only war the US would ever lose so he escalated everything, bombing Hanoi and mining the harbor, going into Laos and Cambodia, leaning on 'Uncle Ho' real hard so they would come to the 'peace table' so he could bail out and save his ass.

---

You are mostly correct. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (Joint Resolution of Congress HJ RES 1145 August 7, 1964) is when things really started the ball rolling for the United States. Global is correct that by 1967 things were going downhill...however, Johnson was still the President. The Tet offensive, which began on January 30, 1968, was a defeat for North Vietnam militarily but a blow to Johnson's weakened standing at home. Faced with political challenges from Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy in his own party, Johnson also worried about what would happen to his own health if he ran again. On March 31, 1968, he announced that he was limiting the bombing of North Vietnam and was seeking negotiations.

Now go back where Global talked about Nixon.

Nox

The limited bombing also caused a heavy loss of aircraft. I remember reading the story of a pilot who had several SAM batteries in sight, and could not fire on them, because they did not shoot at him, yet some AAA shot at him, and he circled around and destroyed the guns and missiles. When he landed, he was up for a court martial, but he flew on another mission, from which he never returned.

What is really sad is the men we left behind, and their fates. Evidence, right in burecrats faces, point to them still being held after the war, yet it's still ignored. And the bad part is that while they vow on one hand to never do this again, THere are still Gulf War MIA still unaccounted for.

Sorry Mr. Nox, I didn't mean for anyone to think that was any kind of a timeline, I just hit on a few things to give the highlights. I knew Tet didn't come off until '68, and Nixon didn't take over until Jan. of '69, but I could only go into so much in one post.

The only thing I would add would be the way things wound up in '75, very bad. Once the bail-out started it really went south, everybody looking out for themselves. We left countless people who were loyal to the cause twisting in the wind, cannon fodder for the NVC. Nobody knows for certain just how many MIA's were left in prisons there because we didn't turn over to the North what belonged to them. And then came Carter and his pardon of all the deserters, just thinking about all of it again makes me sick.

I still don't get the whole Diem thing. They support him, then sanction his assasination? I understand that he was getting out of hand, but didn't it just exacerbate the problem?

peace out.
sph3ric pyramid.

Yes it did. We faced the same dilemma after the Gulf War and whether to take out Saddam. I'm sure the Diem lesson was not lost on the decision makers at the time.

Global,

Please don't apologize. All I tried to do was fill in a little detail. I thought your synopsis was good.

Nox

quote:

---

Originally posted by sph3ric pyramid:
I still don't get the whole Diem thing. They support him, then sanction his assasination? I understand that he was getting out of hand, but didn't it just exacerbate the problem?

peace out.
sph3ric pyramid.

---

It's the same as with Saddam. We hated him and Iran, but he was the lesser of two evils, same with Stalin.

Vietnam was just a brilliant and costly display of how to fuck up a military action. Politicians didn't and still don't realize that wars are a matter of killing, not negotiating. Had US forces been allowed to ruthlessly and efficiently devastate all Communist forces in the region, I feel that things would have worked much better. Instead, we made a half-assed attempt at fighting, and the enemy was given every possible oppurtunity to study our tactics behind the safety of the invisible lines we drew.

If we must fight Iraq, I only hope that we implement the same outstanding offense we displayed in the Gulf War, and this time actually follow through until UN inspectors are left examining rocks and pointy sticks.

Amen bro.

Nox

The main problem is that the Vietnamese didn't like the military dictatorship they were under, which made it very easy for the Viet Cong to fight a guerilla war, as the locals believed their bullshit and tacitly supported their cause.

America may have been capable of winning a military victory with efficient use of their military might but they were some way off winning the hearts of the people and undermining the support for Communism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sph3ric pyramid:
I still don't get the whole Diem thing. They support him, then sanction his assasination? I understand that he was getting out of hand, but didn't it just exacerbate the problem?

---

Diem was a puppet, our puppet. We put him in and kept him there because he did what he was told. Then one day he started believing some of the stuff his advisors told him, stuff like "you don't need the US" and "we can defeat the communists all by ourselves." Then he started doing as he pleased and not as he was told, and that was when we let it be known we wouldn't be mad if someone whacked him, so they did, and we got a new "Timmy."

War should be what it was meant to be, an all out, balls to the walls fight with everything in your arsenal until one side or the other says "uncle." That is the main lesson from the 'Nam, never let a politician tell you how to fight.

I hate for this to sound like a dig at the younger folks, but don't ever forget what happened there. My nephew was all pissed over what he thought was his father's inattention to certain situations in his life. He was bitching about it to me one day, I thought I would bring him up to speed. I asked him if his father ever told him about being "over there." He said "Viet what?" I then proceeded to tell him a couple of the things my brother-in-law had told me on his return.

He was a door-gunner on a Huey, not exactly the job with much of a future, I think they said his life expectancy was on the order of 10 seconds in combat. He was shot down three times. Normally in a chopper you only get shot down once, then you go home in a box. All three times he was shot down in the midst of the enemy, and shelled for at least 2 days before help came and brought him out. Then they would give him a new chopper. I can't go into the situations more than that, there is just too much to say. He saw his friend from the neighborhood step on a booby-trap, had his dog eaten by the locals, wounded more than once, and after he came home I noticed that he left a portion of his mind over there. It was a few months before you could wake him up some other way than throwing a pillow or something at him because when his feet hit the floor you didn't want to be within reach. To this day he still isn't 'here', and never will be.

It is up to you younger people to see it doesn't ever happen again.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Global Dominator:
If your father doesn't tell you about being there, he is doing you a favor. There are stories in his head that would make you shit your pants, just don't ask. If the day ever comes that he wants to talk about those days, he'll let you know, until then just let the demon sleep.

---

Yea, Vietnam was pretty bad. My old boss who was a Sniper in Vietnam told me tons of stories, some were funny, some were fucked up, some were just disgusting, like the competitions he had with his fellow snipers. Whenever you killed someone, you had to cut off both ears and put them on a string, it was to be both ears, not just one, and then who has the most wins. Thats pretty bad i think, and that was on the American side, so we werent that innocent. Ive seen clips of traps that the vietnamese set and pictures of people and how they look after they steped into these traps, nothing you really want to see.