View Single Post
  #54  
Old 11-30-2007, 09:05 AM
Kaj Kaj is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bet-the-pot
Posts: 1,812
Default Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?

[ QUOTE ]
The military certainly did a good job at the military bits and the political situation changed and the people didn't want to win nomore.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree and so do many Vietnam war heroes and military analysts. Excerpt below from an excellent article on Vietnam's winnability, hosted on the US Army War College's site.

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue"> Such military observers as Harry Summers, Jr., Andrew Krepinevich, Jr., David Hackworth, Dave Richard Palmer, Douglas Kinnard, and Bruce Palmer, Jr., are critical of the professional military's performance in Vietnam as well as that of civilian authority. Readers will discover among their writings[38] often brutal condemnations of professional hubris, the attrition strategy, excessive use of firepower, reliance on lavish base camps, self-defeating personnel rotation policies, command disunity and micromanagement, and an officer corps corrupted by careerism--none of which can be laid at the doorsteps of McNamara's whiz kids, David Halberstam, or Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda. These and other critics have properly concluded that no debacle as epic as America's in Vietnam can be ascribed solely to either military or civilian authority. Neither acquitted itself well, though ultimate responsibility for what happened to the United States in Vietnam rests with the White House. Harry Summers has observed that much of the criticism of political interference in military operations "is off the mark. Our problem was not so much political interference as it was a lack of a coherent military strategy--a lack for which our military leaders share a large burden of responsibility."</font>

[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote