-
Vietnam War
The Sixties; The Beatles Decade is currently off air
The Vietnam War shook America's military self-confidence to the core. More than 58,000 U.S. soldiers died fighting a war in which their seemingly all-powerful nation suffered a humiliating defeat.
Human cost
But the human cost for the Vietnamese themselves was truly terrible: an estimated 2 million civilians died, along with around 1.1 million North Vietnamese forces and between 200,000 and 250,000 South Vietnamese forces.
Like many 20th-century conflicts, the Vietnam War had it roots in the fag-end of colonialism. In 1945, France, the colonial power in the region, tried to reassert control over Vietnam. But communist insurgents, led by Ho Chi Minh, fought a long campaign to remove the French and gain control of the whole country. In 1954, French forces abandoned the struggle, leaving Ho at the head of a communist regime in North Vietnam. He was committed to overthrowing the weak, pro-Western government in South Vietnam.
Viet Cong
Washington, meanwhile, was determined to halt the spread of communism in Asia. It began sending weapons and increasing numbers of military advisers to South Vietnam. By 1962, there were around 9,000 U.S. military advisers helping the South Vietnamese army battle a powerful and committed North Vietnamese force of regular soldiers and Viet Cong guerrillas.
In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson, authorised the despatch of 200,000 U.S. soldiers. Over the next few years, Washington sent more and more troops to Vietnam (around 550,000 at its height) but, despite their awesome firepower, they achieved little on the battlefield. Viet Cong units had infiltrated large tracts of rural South Vietnam. U.S. troops would push them back in one location only to find they popped up elsewhere.
By the late 1960s, U.S. public opinion was turning against involvement in Vietnam. Anti-war protests erupted across the country. In 1969, President Richard Nixon ordered a scaling down of troop numbers. The last U.S. combat units left in 1973. Two years later, North Vietnam launched a massive, largely unopposed attack on the south. Saigon fell and the county was united under communist rule.
But the human cost for the Vietnamese themselves was truly terrible: an estimated 2 million civilians died, along with around 1.1 million North Vietnamese forces and between 200,000 and 250,000 South Vietnamese forces.
Like many 20th-century conflicts, the Vietnam War had it roots in the fag-end of colonialism. In 1945, France, the colonial power in the region, tried to reassert control over Vietnam. But communist insurgents, led by Ho Chi Minh, fought a long campaign to remove the French and gain control of the whole country. In 1954, French forces abandoned the struggle, leaving Ho at the head of a communist regime in North Vietnam. He was committed to overthrowing the weak, pro-Western government in South Vietnam.
Viet Cong
Washington, meanwhile, was determined to halt the spread of communism in Asia. It began sending weapons and increasing numbers of military advisers to South Vietnam. By 1962, there were around 9,000 U.S. military advisers helping the South Vietnamese army battle a powerful and committed North Vietnamese force of regular soldiers and Viet Cong guerrillas.
In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson, authorised the despatch of 200,000 U.S. soldiers. Over the next few years, Washington sent more and more troops to Vietnam (around 550,000 at its height) but, despite their awesome firepower, they achieved little on the battlefield. Viet Cong units had infiltrated large tracts of rural South Vietnam. U.S. troops would push them back in one location only to find they popped up elsewhere.
By the late 1960s, U.S. public opinion was turning against involvement in Vietnam. Anti-war protests erupted across the country. In 1969, President Richard Nixon ordered a scaling down of troop numbers. The last U.S. combat units left in 1973. Two years later, North Vietnam launched a massive, largely unopposed attack on the south. Saigon fell and the county was united under communist rule.
Your Comments
-
VincentA28031
wrote on 22 Jan 2011 at 01:19 AM
Hi again, Ian! As far as I understand the general attitude of the U.S. in the early fifties, they wanted to avoid a domino effect caused by communist aggressive empire building. I think that view was totally understandable, myself, given what the U.S.S.R. had done in eastern Europe, and what they feared the Chinese communists might potentially do after winning their civil war against Chan Kai Shek's forces. But as for the French, well they were massively committed in Indo-China at the time (and their other colonies too), and so they probably just could not have afforded to have involved themselves in a conflict on the scale of the Korean war. And of course their economy was still struggling to recover from the Second World War. Mind you, inspite of recent meetings and reports of much improved relations between Obama and Sarkozy, they have always had a very on/off, love/hate relationship with each other! And as far as the conflict in Indo-China was concerned, if only they'd listened to the sensible advice of people like the late Earl Mountbatten of Burma, they might, only might, just have avoided getting themselves bogged down in an ultimately disastrous conflict out there. But arrogant, nationalistic and colonialist pride ruled their politics and military at the time, and as we all know, it ultimately ended in tragedy and humiliation for them. - Something to say? Add a comment...
- See all posts
Select your bookmark
What is social bookmarking?