I went to Vietnam because my father, family, and I trusted our government. At twenty I didn't understand the domestic and international politics of the situation. I thought burning my draft card or rushing off to Canada were unpatriotic things to do.
My parents set an example of appropriate behavior when our nation called for their service in earlier times. In 1941 the United States responded to clear attacks at Pearl Harbor and the Nazis in a major way. I went to Vietnam because, like my parents, and many other family members and friends it seemed the right and proper thing for a citizen to do and seemed an honorable family tradition.
In retrospect, Vietnam was a civil war and we were caught in a cruel crossfire. I slowly realized, President Johnson and his generals were more concerned with geopolitics and less with military victory. Congress never had the guts to make a formal declaration of war. When the Jane Fonda's, John Kerry's, and media turned against American soldiers in Vietnam our efforts became futile and the body bags multiplied. Nearly sixty thousand including eight women died in Vietnam. Two thirds of those killed were aged 22 or younger. We came home to jeers and at best an indifferent public. We did our duty, but were burdened by the shame of losing an unpopular war. Additionally, a few highly publicized war atrocities and a rise in drug use among soldiers detracted from the heroism and dedication to duty shown by the majority.
Veterans of Vietnam are old men and women now. However, we must proudly take our place with the veterans of other American wars as citizens who did our best we could. Like our parents we loved our country and easily and bravely sprang to it's defense. Sadly from Vietnam, as from all our wars, too many of my generation made the ultimate sacrifice or came home physically or mentally brutalized. Finally, many decades past the "conflict" Vietnam veterans are receiving are receiving the respect which is due all military old timers.
Our military should react with total hell fire when our teritory or national interests are savagely attacked. If Congress declares war, the enemy is identified, and we have a clear mission in place it should be balls to the walls til victory. Sadly, the last war authorized by Congress was World War II and all military engagements since then have been caused by old politicians more interested in politics and their re elections than the young people they dispatch to war.
Never again should we fight under a Untied Nations banner (Korea - 50000 Americans killed) or enter a war without a clear declaration from our politicians. We should avoid engagement in foreign civil wars lacking a clear threat to our national security. We must always remember civil wars are the worst. Our Civil War was the deadliest war in our nations history.
Ultimately, we must wonder if our politicians really understand the business of war and proper use of the energies, talents, and lives of the young men and women in our military ? After decades, has our government learned anything from Vietnam and the numerous "conflicts" and "policing actions" authorized by Congress or the President ? Considering the military lives lost and maimed bodies and minds since the last formal declaration of war in 1941 it seems our national politicos just don't give a damn.
My parents set an example of appropriate behavior when our nation called for their service in earlier times. In 1941 the United States responded to clear attacks at Pearl Harbor and the Nazis in a major way. I went to Vietnam because, like my parents, and many other family members and friends it seemed the right and proper thing for a citizen to do and seemed an honorable family tradition.
In retrospect, Vietnam was a civil war and we were caught in a cruel crossfire. I slowly realized, President Johnson and his generals were more concerned with geopolitics and less with military victory. Congress never had the guts to make a formal declaration of war. When the Jane Fonda's, John Kerry's, and media turned against American soldiers in Vietnam our efforts became futile and the body bags multiplied. Nearly sixty thousand including eight women died in Vietnam. Two thirds of those killed were aged 22 or younger. We came home to jeers and at best an indifferent public. We did our duty, but were burdened by the shame of losing an unpopular war. Additionally, a few highly publicized war atrocities and a rise in drug use among soldiers detracted from the heroism and dedication to duty shown by the majority.
Veterans of Vietnam are old men and women now. However, we must proudly take our place with the veterans of other American wars as citizens who did our best we could. Like our parents we loved our country and easily and bravely sprang to it's defense. Sadly from Vietnam, as from all our wars, too many of my generation made the ultimate sacrifice or came home physically or mentally brutalized. Finally, many decades past the "conflict" Vietnam veterans are receiving are receiving the respect which is due all military old timers.
Our military should react with total hell fire when our teritory or national interests are savagely attacked. If Congress declares war, the enemy is identified, and we have a clear mission in place it should be balls to the walls til victory. Sadly, the last war authorized by Congress was World War II and all military engagements since then have been caused by old politicians more interested in politics and their re elections than the young people they dispatch to war.
Never again should we fight under a Untied Nations banner (Korea - 50000 Americans killed) or enter a war without a clear declaration from our politicians. We should avoid engagement in foreign civil wars lacking a clear threat to our national security. We must always remember civil wars are the worst. Our Civil War was the deadliest war in our nations history.
Ultimately, we must wonder if our politicians really understand the business of war and proper use of the energies, talents, and lives of the young men and women in our military ? After decades, has our government learned anything from Vietnam and the numerous "conflicts" and "policing actions" authorized by Congress or the President ? Considering the military lives lost and maimed bodies and minds since the last formal declaration of war in 1941 it seems our national politicos just don't give a damn.
HOW IT ALL STARTED
ReplyDeleteThe Battle of Dien Bien Phu (French: Bataille de Diên Biên Phu; Vietnamese: Chiến dịch Điện Biên Phủ) was the climactic confrontation of the First Indochina War between the French Union's French Far East Expeditionary Corps and Viet Minh communist-nationalist revolutionaries. The battle occurred between March and May 1954 and culminated in a comprehensive French defeat that influenced negotiations over the future of Indochina at Geneva. Military historian Martin Windrow wrote that Dien Bien Phu was "the first time that a non-European colonial independence movement had evolved through all the stages from guerrilla bands to a conventionally organized and equipped army able to defeat a modern Western occupier in pitched battle."[12]
As a result of blunders in French decision-making, the French began an operation to support the soldiers at Dien Bien Phu, deep in the hills of northwestern Vietnam. Its purpose was to cut off Viet Minh supply lines into the neighboring Kingdom of Laos, a French ally, and tactically draw the Viet Minh into a major confrontation that would cripple them. The Viet Minh, however, under General Vo Nguyen Giap, surrounded and besieged the French, who were unaware of the Viet Minh's possession of heavy artillery (including anti-aircraft guns) and their ability to move these weapons through difficult terrain, up the reverse slopes of the mountains surrounding the French positions, dig tunnels through the mountain, and position the artillery pieces overlooking the French encampment. This positioning of the artillery made it impervious to counter battery fire.
When the Viet Minh opened fire, the French artillery commander, Charles Piroth, committed suicide with a hand grenade. The Viet Minh occupied the highlands around Dien Bien Phu and bombarded French positions. Tenacious fighting on the ground ensued, reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I. The French repeatedly repulsed Viet Minh assaults on their positions. Supplies and reinforcements were delivered by air, though as the French positions were overrun, the French perimeter contracted, and the anti-aircraft fire took its toll, fewer and fewer of those supplies reached them. The garrison was overrun after a two-month siege and most French forces surrendered. A few escaped to Laos. The French government resigned and the new Prime Minister, the left of centre Pierre Mendès France, supported French withdrawal from Indochina.
The war ended shortly after the Battle of Dien Bien Phu and the signing of the 1954 Geneva Accords. France agreed to withdraw its forces from all its colonies in French Indochina, while stipulating that Vietnam would be temporarily divided at the 17th parallel, with control of the north given to the Viet Minh as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh, and the south becoming the State of Vietnam under Emperor Bao Dai, preventing Ho Chi Minh from gaining control of the entire country.[13] The failure of North and South to enter into negotiations about holding nationwide elections in 1956, as had been stipulated by the Geneva Conference, would eventually lead to War in Vietnam (1959–1963) and escalation to the full participation of American combat troops following the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964.
HOW IT ALL STARTED
ReplyDeleteThe Battle of Dien Bien Phu (French: Bataille de Diên Biên Phu; Vietnamese: Chiến dịch Điện Biên Phủ) was the climactic confrontation of the First Indochina War between the French Union's French Far East Expeditionary Corps and Viet Minh communist-nationalist revolutionaries. The battle occurred between March and May 1954 and culminated in a comprehensive French defeat that influenced negotiations over the future of Indochina at Geneva. Military historian Martin Windrow wrote that Dien Bien Phu was "the first time that a non-European colonial independence movement had evolved through all the stages from guerrilla bands to a conventionally organized and equipped army able to defeat a modern Western occupier in pitched battle."[12]
As a result of blunders in French decision-making, the French began an operation to support the soldiers at Dien Bien Phu, deep in the hills of northwestern Vietnam. Its purpose was to cut off Viet Minh supply lines into the neighboring Kingdom of Laos, a French ally, and tactically draw the Viet Minh into a major confrontation that would cripple them. The Viet Minh, however, under General Vo Nguyen Giap, surrounded and besieged the French, who were unaware of the Viet Minh's possession of heavy artillery (including anti-aircraft guns) and their ability to move these weapons through difficult terrain, up the reverse slopes of the mountains surrounding the French positions, dig tunnels through the mountain, and position the artillery pieces overlooking the French encampment. This positioning of the artillery made it impervious to counter battery fire.
When the Viet Minh opened fire, the French artillery commander, Charles Piroth, committed suicide with a hand grenade. The Viet Minh occupied the highlands around Dien Bien Phu and bombarded French positions. Tenacious fighting on the ground ensued, reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I. The French repeatedly repulsed Viet Minh assaults on their positions. Supplies and reinforcements were delivered by air, though as the French positions were overrun, the French perimeter contracted, and the anti-aircraft fire took its toll, fewer and fewer of those supplies reached them. The garrison was overrun after a two-month siege and most French forces surrendered. A few escaped to Laos. The French government resigned and the new Prime Minister, the left of centre Pierre Mendès France, supported French withdrawal from Indochina.
The war ended shortly after the Battle of Dien Bien Phu and the signing of the 1954 Geneva Accords. France agreed to withdraw its forces from all its colonies in French Indochina, while stipulating that Vietnam would be temporarily divided at the 17th parallel, with control of the north given to the Viet Minh as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh, and the south becoming the State of Vietnam under Emperor Bao Dai, preventing Ho Chi Minh from gaining control of the entire country.[13] The failure of North and South to enter into negotiations about holding nationwide elections in 1956, as had been stipulated by the Geneva Conference, would eventually lead to War in Vietnam (1959–1963) and escalation to the full participation of American combat troops following the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964.
Thanks Butch for the history leading to our involvement in Vietnam.
ReplyDeleteIt would have been better to have been Ho Chi Minh's friend, rather than his enemy. South Vietnamese may have fought the North, but they still held Ho Chi Minh in high regard and referred to him as Uncle Ho. In the end VietNam united anyway and became the most disenchanted Communist Country. We could have won them over with Capitalism. It would have been better to Study under General Vo Nguyen Giap rather than engage him in battle. He wrote the definitive book on Guerrilla Warfare and those that were smart enough READ it. A little more Irony - Much of what General Giap applied came from our old foe Geronimo. YES - Those that don't learn from History are doomed to repeat it.
ReplyDelete