|
Post by Sir John on Jun 16, 2013 15:19:16 GMT -5
MS,
Trouble with that was that they were quite happy to trade 100 NVs etc for one American etc, and as HCM said, you will tire of it first.
Deny then land in which to operate, and maybe you had a chance. Maybe start at Saigon and expand out until you hold it all.
Maybe yes, maybe no.
SJ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 15:36:52 GMT -5
No , what you need to understand at the end of the tet offensive the war won or at least the American part was , when it became a reality that the South could not for what ever reason capitalize on the Victory then there wasn't going to be a Victory , ever , that left the Americans in a predicament which ended in attrition , American units were given perks for the biggest body counts , the Grunts got greedy and counted every body as theirs whether the kill was from artillery , air , sun stroke or any other way , a leg was no longer counted as a kill or arm now a head was good for one , I'm not kidding you about this .
|
|
|
Post by jerryfmcompushaft on Jun 16, 2013 15:40:43 GMT -5
Which points up the problem with the strategy used in Vietnam. You just couldn't kill enough of them to make them all quit. Now - cut off their supplies by closing the Trail and you have a chance of turning the unsupplied soldiers into peaceful farmers or scared refugees hiding out in any village that would accept them. Sure they could probably find enough to eat or someone scared enough to feed them but they couldn't wage successful war without ammunition. I know the trail had many paths but I also know it was relatively easy to spot these paths, and to know which ones were getting the most use. Those would be the ones I'd deny first.... When the supplies dry up - the soldier's ability to fight is severely eroded.... Kill a 100 NVA and they just send in 100 more (down the Trail, by the way), but close the trail (or even half of it, you deny many more NVA the ability to kill Americans except by knife, rock or club (easier to defend against)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 15:45:47 GMT -5
LBJ said Bomb them back into the caves MacNamara said Sir they're already living in Caves .
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Jun 16, 2013 16:01:14 GMT -5
If the US had managed to close down the Trail, wouldn't they have simply created a new one in the jungle?
SJ
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Jun 16, 2013 16:15:27 GMT -5
Jerry was right. Furthermore, the Japanese and Germans had the same strategy in WWII, but they still lost.
As for cutting the Trail, if the Americans had cut all the way across Laos and used Thailand as part of the giant defensive line, the NVA would have been cut off. They might try tunnels, but those can be flooded and detected as well.
Not only that, if the Americans also made giant raids into the north, coupled with bombing as they did with Linebacker, the NVA would have been unable to function. It worked in two countries during WWII, and it would have worked in North Vietnam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 16:48:13 GMT -5
The most effective offence against N.Vietnam was the Christmas Bombings of 1972 it bombed the N.Vietnamse back to the truce tables in Paris , Giap said if we had bombed one more week we ( The N.Vietnamses ) would have to surrender .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 17:12:54 GMT -5
The Americans tried everything 56.000 dead ( lives ) worth to Help the S.Vietnamses win the conflict , remember the Americans were there in a SUPPORT ROLE , SUPPORT ROLE it was not our war , just as Korea was , We gave the Koreas a life a chance and they kept right on rolling so one conflict worked the other didn't .
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Jun 16, 2013 19:11:01 GMT -5
The most effective offence against N.Vietnam was the Christmas Bombings of 1972 it bombed the N.Vietnamse back to the truce tables in Paris , Giap said if we had bombed one more week we ( The N.Vietnamses ) would have to surrender . Exactly!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 21:32:30 GMT -5
A surrender doesn't always mean a surrender , Hanoi would concede check mate and cease operations , the US would leave , the South Vietnamese has already shown they are inept or useless whichever comes first , back to square one , there is no way the US could occupy the North the logistics would be a nightmare and China would not want a US presents that close to home . Sooooo . In Paris the NVA were punch drunk but great poker players they negotiated a deal on hot air they really had no cards to play the US wanted out at any cost and quite willing to give the NVA a deal that only the NVA could live with .
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Jun 16, 2013 22:00:45 GMT -5
By that time, Congress had wanted to leave, so there was no chance of winning. If LBJ and friggin' McNamara had gone all out with the bombing campaign, things would have been different.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2013 22:29:12 GMT -5
LBJ started our involvement in the Conflict with the Bay of Tonkin then he curtailed the US bombing campaign his flip flop caused many a young to go to the grave .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2013 13:26:02 GMT -5
The War was winnable if you weren't there , not so much if you were a participant , we flew some kilo's into Ton sa Nuth , the Air Force knew how to live , movie theaters , swimming pools , bowling alleys , snack bars , we weren't there 20 min. but it seemed like I was back in the states
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Jun 17, 2013 13:44:14 GMT -5
What has the winnability of the war got to do with the Air Force's lifestyle?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2013 14:13:12 GMT -5
there WAS no win so you might as well enjoy yourself , there simply was no win in Vietnam , none , the Country we were SUPPORTING was unable to hold their end up , they could not step up , man up , useless , utterly useless , like many Americans I detested them . but understand I was looking at them in a combat mode , they might have been useful in some other role .
|
|