Why did the US lose the Vietnam War? page 3

254 posts

Flag Post

bq.I think because the US had over confidence back then. They took Vietnam for granted.

There’s some truth to this; the U.S. incorrectly compared the situation in Vietnam to that in Korea where they’d been not long before, and been significantly more successful from an official strategy standpoint. Asa child, my mom explained it to me by saying that we (the States) didn’t do our homework and just tried to copy the paper we’d written for the last project. I always liked that analogy. Of course more complicated than that but as an explanation for a 6 year old, it worked.

 
Flag Post

We didn’t lose the vietnam war it was that we decided to pull out and the conflict is still on in vietnam.

 
Flag Post

We had so many losses during the war and the fact that we still hadn’t won struck a real blow to the american citizens

they began turning their back on the government
basically
We could’ve won the war if we had stayed longer
but we would lost many more troops

So we pulled out

 
Flag Post

We didn’t lose the vietnam war it was that we decided to pull out and the conflict is still on in vietnam.

why are you so afraid to admit a defeat? everyone agrees that U.S. lost the war in Vietnam, except for some really cocky Americans

 
Flag Post

Sure explains how we won just about every battle.
America did not lose in Vietnam. We left well before the south fell. It is more appropriate to say America left Vietnam halfway through. Had we stayed things may have been very different.

in asymmetric warfare it doesn’t matter who wins the battles. the ‘freedom fighters’ already know that their death toll will be astronomic (like ho chi minh said (even before the u.s. entered the war): “You can kill 10 of my men for every one I kill of yours, yet even at those odds, you will lose and I will win.”) most of the time it’s guerillas against an invading force and they’ve won by definition if their country is left alone. if they kill all invaders or ‘just’ force them to leave doesn’t matter.

the u.s. at the time believed in containment and wanted to restrain communist influence in the area. that also failed.

no matter how you turn it: the united states of america lost the vietnam war.

 
Flag Post

[deleted]

 
Flag Post

Interesting Kubrick. Y U so kool?

 
Flag Post

why? us lost because they suck in land warfare no offense. us soilders cant fight worth shit in plains then how do u thinks they good do u think they can do in jungles besides china was on viet side. thats a 2-million army against ur 500,000, if u add the chinese plus the viets thats more than 5 to 1 against us of course us had no chance at all
its said that it would take us 1700 dollars in bombs to kill a viet con but it only take them 2 dollars in bullets to a us soilder… how do u think us not lose… reference history channel

 
Flag Post

We lost because no-one wanted to go there in the first place and we had no reason. Say…. that sounds alot like Iraq…..

 
Flag Post

We lost because no-one wanted to go there in the first place and we had no reason. Say…. that sounds alot like Iraq…..

Why do you go to war if you dont want to go? That doesnt make sense.

 
Flag Post

u.s lost because the vc out smarted them by using gurilla tactics the americans relied on air surport when it was jungle warfare

 
Flag Post

Hippie liberals with no balls cost us the war. The VC were badly outmatched.

You could also say television was to blame for the war being lost. You can also then blame the scientists who invented television, and then god for creating electrons that run televisions.

So in the end, god cost us the war.

 
Flag Post

As for the question of air power mentioned in the OP:

This isn’t the only war lost when the losing side had air superiority. ISAF forces have it in Afghanistan at the moment. Are they winning?

As for Vietnam:
It certainly damaged North Vietnam’s war effort and disrupted supply routes to a certain extent. It also enabled the US to continue engaging Vietnamese ground forces whilst removing its own by 1969. Thirdly, US bombing of Hanoi and the port of Haiphong forced the North Vietnamese to the negotiating table.
BUT

It alone couldn’t defeat the communists. It could only slow them down. The VC continued to operate its supply lines, even after major US air raids in 72 the communists were still able to launch major assaults on the South. In addition the cost to the US was great. 14,000 US and South Vietnamese aircraft were shot down. It took an estimated $400,000 worth of weaponry to kill one VC comparable to 75 bombs and 400 shells.

However in my opinion the main reason the US lost was the VC’s adoption of Mao style guerilla warfare tactics. The fact they didn’t wear uniform or have any known HQ meant the US couldn’t distinguish the enemy from the normal civvie population. Their use of traps and ambushes were very effective in the wearing down of US morale. They (mostly) kept the hearts and minds of the population by being courteous to the peasants and helping during busy harvest periods retaining the support of the rural population meaning they could be fed and rearmed in any village giving them superior mobility than the US troops. They were also extremely ruthless, killing around 27,000 members of the South Vietnamese government. However their greatest strength was their refusal to give in. The total death toll for the North Vietnamese and VC is estimated at 1million, however it was a price they were willing to pay, and due to the fact they had so much civilian support there were always replacements readily available.

 
Flag Post

My wife’s Vietnamese. She told me: Then, American soldiers were very horny and Vietnamese women are pretty(they are still). The Viet leaders engage these temptress to gain informations……
Off topic: Vietnam has a Women Day. ALL women eat, drink, play, for free and have discounts for shopping on every 3rd of August. At least in the cities….

How true it is? IDK
How much impact if true? Very much!

 
Flag Post

USA lost because the vietnamese could quickly transform back into peasant life and the americans could not kill a peasant unless they could proove they were a soldier which they could not, so as soon as the vietnamese started to take a beating they just disguised themselves as farmer joe

 
Flag Post

Indeed, in any war not having the ability to distinguish between the civilian population and the enemy is a major disadvantage. What the Americans started doing towards the end of the war, rather cleverly, was relocating entire villages from hostile zones for ‘security purposes’ removing the VC’s advantage of being able to blend in and gather supplies.

 
Flag Post

What the Americans started doing towards the end of the war, rather cleverly, was relocating entire villages from hostile zones for ‘security purposes’ removing the VC’s advantage of being able to blend in and gather supplies.

I hope you’re being sarcastic. The strategic hamlet program was a horrible failure.

 
Flag Post

If it was so unsuccessful then why are the ISAF forces planning to repeat its use in Afghanistan citing the success of its original use in Vietnam as justification?

 
Flag Post

Because Vietnam is in the axis of evil and to paraphrase what George Bush said “they some mean mofos”

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Solidus:

What the Americans started doing towards the end of the war, rather cleverly, was relocating entire villages from hostile zones for ‘security purposes’ removing the VC’s advantage of being able to blend in and gather supplies.

I hope you’re being sarcastic. The strategic hamlet program was a horrible failure.

Not exactly. It could have gone better, but the problem was more one of logistics and shortsightedness than anything. Failure to account for family size, improper placement of new villages without concern to work distances, and poorly planned defenses are what kept the plan from being an overall success. That being said the operation did work to seperate, for a time, the VC from one of their ‘pillars’.

 
Flag Post

Indeed from a strategic point of view it did limit the VC’s mobility. That is why the British and Americans are planning to implement some form of it in Afghanistan.

 
Flag Post

Liberal hippies lost us the war.

 
Flag Post

Liberal hippies lost us the war.

Is it too much to ask you not to act like a complete twat in every topic?

 
Flag Post

Marijuana did it and it is quite possibly the greatest thing it has ever done.

 
Flag Post

the us woulnt have lost if they didnt even get involved in the first place….there was no reason to fight and even to this day people are being born with disfigured faces and ligements…why? because the us used a deadly bomb called napalm and that caused so many vietnamese do die or even get injured…..and today, tomorrow and even falways people will always remember vietanm as a war and not a country…….THEY KILLED INOCENT VIETNAMESE PEOPLE FOR NO REASON AT ALL….!