Jump to content


Photo

Vietnam War what if?


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#81 Tony Williams

Tony Williams

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,601 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Military guns and ammunition (all calibres)

Posted 29 September 2005 - 2127 PM

I think this sounds like another book plot for you Tony  :)  I would love to read a "Foresight War" on Vietnam....hmmm... "We need a J-STARTS Mr. McNamara and get J. Edgar Hoover to arrest this young lady named Jane Fonda on some trumped up charge"  :D

View Post


No thanks - the period doesn't especially interest me (no British involvement!). If I were to do another (which I have no plans to), it would be about WW1.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
  • 0

#82 Macarthur

Macarthur

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 2341 PM

If I recall, one of the problems that occured later int he war was that Special Forces wer ebeing used in paramilitary 'lone gun' style attacks, whcih while for the most part successful, were not what they were sent to do in the first place which was to persuade Vietnamese villages (on either side of the line) to help america and to train the ones that agreed in geurilla warfare and arm them with American weapons. The project ended when they SOFs were told to relocate the villages instead of leave them in place which pretty much ended the villages support, which convinced the brass that the SOFs mission was a lost cause.

I've read a few analysis that said that if the SOFs had been allowed to train and equip the villagers then the NVA and Viet Cong's support would have evaporated, the Ho Chi Minh Trail would have died a quiet and and choked death and there would be a democratic integrated Vietnam.

just a thought.
  • 0

#83 Rickshaw

Rickshaw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,248 posts

Posted 30 September 2005 - 0328 AM

They were allowed to arm and train the villagers, as I understand it. The problem was that many of the villagers were genuine supporters of the Communists rather than the South's government, particularly after the disasterous attempts to implement the Strategic Hamlet campaign in the early 1960s. So arming the villagers often just provided arms for the NLF.
  • 0

#84 KingSargent

KingSargent

    Fill your hand you shummabysh!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,921 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alaska
  • Interests:History, weapons.

Posted 30 September 2005 - 0335 AM

They were allowed to arm and train the villagers, as I understand it.  The problem was that many of the villagers were genuine supporters of the Communists rather than the South's government, particularly after the disasterous attempts to implement the Strategic Hamlet campaign in the early 1960s.  So arming the villagers often just provided arms for the NLF.

View Post

And I believe the most successful "Village Groups" were among the Hmong(sp?) who could have cared less about Communism, they hated all the lowlanders.

This is a problem the US has in this type of situation, we think the war is about one ideal or doctrine, when a lot of "guerilla movements" are simply bandits and a lot of killings are for personal reasons.
  • 0

#85 Rickshaw

Rickshaw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,248 posts

Posted 30 September 2005 - 0440 AM

And I believe the most successful "Village Groups" were among the Hmong(sp?) who could have cared less about Communism, they hated all the lowlanders.

This is a problem the US has in this type of situation, we think the war is about one ideal or doctrine, when a lot of "guerilla movements" are simply bandits and a lot of killings are for personal reasons.

View Post



Yep, which goes back to what I said earlier. The Vietnamese knew who they were fighting - first the French and then the Americans. The Americans believed they were fighting the Russians and the Chinese.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users