Fred is my favorite blogger.....and a fellow Vietnam Vet.
http://fredoneverything.org/a-petticoat-military-comedy-in-uniform/
http://fredoneverything.org/a-petticoat-military-comedy-in-uniform/
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
The United States Army has not won a war since 1945.
Having served twice in Vietnam as an Infantryman, I find that statement painfully insulting!
Unfortunately it's true. America did not win in Vietnam. It was all a damn shame.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
North Vietnam signed a peace treaty effectively surrendering. The U.S. pledged aid to the South Vietnamese to continue the fight. Following Nixon's resignation and the next election, the Democrats won overwhelmingly and voted to defund our military aid to the South Vietnamese and the inevitable happened. We kicked ass militarily in Vietnam. Congress (the politicians) walked away from our promise to South Vietnam. Did we lose Vietnam? Not necessarily.
Unfortunately it's true. America did not win in Vietnam. It was all a damn shame.
You too?
A loss is a loss doesn't matter how well the Army acquitted itself on the ground. You can split hairs but here's the simple truth: the self same politicians you talk about were not just in congress or the White House. They also were in uniform. The political generals. Let's not forget the ticket punchers, the six month company command tours, the destruction of the NCO Corps and an ever changing agenda and strategy with ill defined objectives. McNamara and Johnson knew we couldn't win and the American people lacked the resolve.
Before you excoriate me and say I don't know what I'm talking about, I served from 1968-1972 I was not in country, I saw the effects of the war on the military. Some of you pride yourself on how chickenshit garrison life was CONUS well it was that attitude that permeated the leadership and prosecution of the war at the strategic level.
Later on I went back on active duty from 1982 to 1998 so I probably wore the uniform longer than most of the responders. I gave the best years of my life to the United States Army and was part of the movement of NCOs and officers (I was both) who tried to build the all volunteer force from the post Viet Nam hollow Army only to see it go further down the tubes in the end. I'll stand by my original statement: the US Army has not won a war since 1945. Desert Storm came close, and I don't know if Just Cause or Urgent Fury count.
It might be a bitter pill for some of you to swallow but I suggest you read both Sun Tszu and Clausewitz. You can win tactically but lose strategically and in geopolitics strategic is where it is at. Robert E Lee may have been the greatest general of the American Civil War and won more than he lost, but in the end it didn't matter.
This in no way takes away your valor, your honor or the integrity of your service but sooner or later you have to come to grips with simple historical fact.
How has it gone further down the tubes again? Politics aside, there is an incredible level of professionalism in todays military. GRANTED my experience is entirely within the Marine Corps, and I know we put a lot of emphasis on small-unit leadership and our NCOs. Mike
Top brass? I mean there have been some great ones... but its always a political dicksucking game.
As far as gender integration... I think its a bad idea but the corresponding increase in standards should if anything result in a net gain.
Nation building is dumb... that doesnt mean the military wouldnt excel in a traditional ground war.
Mike
Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...
J
Do you honestly think standards will be raised? Maybe in the Marines, but we will see how long that lasts once the congressional inquiries begin and if Hillary gets elected there will be no tightening of standards, quite the opposite.
Whether we can win a general war or a limited objective war is moot because we don't fight those kind of wars. We abandoned the Powell Doctrine. Korea and Viet Nam could have been decisive strategic victories but we were prevented from doing so by fears of involving China and/or the USSR in WWIII. MacArthur could not bomb north of the Yalu because the Chinese had privileged sanctuary and we were forbidden from invading North Vietnam even though we had the ability and expertise to do so.
Sure in the right war we can do just fine. No doubt of it. Now where are we going to fight where our leaders aren't going to ebtangle us in a quagmire? You tell me.
The political dicksuckers won't let us win and they haven't since 1945.
The Marine Corps is upping the standards for combat arms by adding MOS specific pass/fail tests and supposedly increasing the fitness test cutoff scores... of course the long term remains to be seen but assuming there is no huge demand placed upon them for numbers I dont see it dropping. Even during the rough part of Iraq the grunt slots were always in the highest demand. Most people join the gun club to shoot stuff. Its enticing guys to go supply and food services that is tough. I can deal with women in the infantry if they can hack it. I think its not worth it in terms of the ammount of women who will get hurt along the way but if the standards truly are upheld it shouldnt hurt anything. Afterall 6% of the USMC is women, maybe 10% of them at most would want to he combat arms, and then as we have seen 30-50% on the enlisted side can do it without getting broken. So to have the infantry become less than 1% female, with mainly beast chicks filling that category, wont hurt it. Mike Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...
In Vietnam, during the TET offensive in 1968, the third Marine division maintained a 10 to 1 kill ratio against the North Vietnamese Army. The NVA was well trained, well supplied and a well led Army, that was defending its own back yard and it didn't matter when it really counted. While I was there it became apparent to me that the only times the NVA did well were when they greatly out numbered their enemy. In a one on contest, they never had the resolve required to achieve victory and usually when we were out numbered, they still didn't have the resolve to win. Half way through my first tour of duty, I signed up for my second tour, because back then, we believed in what we were doing. I left that shithole when the Third Marine Division was reassigned to Okinawa in October of 1969. Here's what I knew when we exited Vietnam. It was a poor decision to send the Third to Okinawa and " we were winning when we left ". That and America is great. It's our elected officials that suck. I cant understand how it is that on a national level, we are so good at producing the troops that defend us, yet so poor at producing / voting into office our political commanders.
In Vietnam, during the TET offensive in 1968, the third Marine division maintained a 10 to 1 kill ratio against the North Vietnamese Army. The NVA was well trained, well supplied and a well led Army, that was defending its own back yard and it didn't matter when it really counted. While I was there it became apparent to me that the only times the NVA did well were when they greatly out numbered their enemy. In a one on contest, they never had the resolve required to achieve victory and usually when we were out numbered, they still didn't have the resolve to win. Half way through my first tour of duty, I signed up for my second tour, because back then, we believed in what we were doing. I left that shithole when the Third Marine Division was reassigned to Okinawa in October of 1969. Here's what I knew when we exited Vietnam. It was a poor decision to send the Third to Okinawa and " we were winning when we left ". That and America is great. It's our elected officials that suck. I cant understand how it is that on a national level, we are so good at producing the troops that defend us, yet so poor at producing / voting into office our political commanders.
Everything you say about Tet 1968 is absolutely 100 percent true. But in the world wide press it was hailed as a great victory for the North Vietnamese and they capitalized on it. The fact that sappers penetrated the Embassy supposedly shook up the brass. Here in the CONUS the American people were being told that the US and South Vietnamese were winning the war and all of a sudden there is this major offensive. It was a military disaster for the North Vietnamese by a psychological victory of the highest magnitude. It was IMO the turning point in the war when the American people really began to question the leadership.
You talk about the leadership, well it just wasn't the politicians but the generals who were politicians in uniform. The fact that there was an ever changing agenda, a changing strategy and Americans were caught in an unfair draft system to fight in a war that was perceived that the South Vietnamese were not carrying their fair share all contributed. Nobody talks about the corruption of the South Vietnamese government or that the domino theory was seriously flawed in retrospect. It doesn't matter how well an Army acquits itself in the field. In war there are no second place winners, and today Saigon is Ho Chi Min City, a bitter pill to swallow but undeniable historical fact.
Having served twice in Vietnam as an Infantryman, I find that statement painfully insulting!
Nobody from either side knows the number of killed and wounded. There was a massive amount of propaganda and US body counts were no better than North Vietnam's claims. What is obvious is that the 2/7 Battalion was massacred. ("We were Soldiers Once" by Col Moore is one of the better books about the war.)
There were many other smaller battles where US troops got hammered.
25 Div, HoBo woods, (Near Tay Ninh) 57 casualties out of a Co of 92
1st Div, Xa Cam My, 109 out of a Co of 134
5th Mar, Op Union, 210 out of 3 Co (Good friend of mine survived this. They advanced across open rice paddies)
1st Mar, Go Noi, 924 out of 3 Battalions (50% casualties)
Hill 875, 173rd, 340 out of 570 who went up the hill
Hamburger Hill, 101st, 564 casualties. 60% in one Bn!!!
So I don't buy into the myth that we never lost a battle. We were subjected to huge propaganda claims by both sides. My personal experience: ARVN would not defend their own country. Viet Cong would only fight if they thought they outnumbered you, and then they would disappear as quickly as they appeared. They didn't wait around for the Phantoms or 155's to come rolling in. I have a lot of respect for their courage and fighting ability.
I had no contact with NVA. They were a well equipped and trained army and their leadership and tactics were as good as ours.
I think US Marines were and are the best trained soldiers and the world. They were not allowed to fight as a result of corrupt politicians and generals. Westmoreland should be buried in a prison graveyard full of former serial killers.
Nobody from either side knows the number of killed and wounded. There was a massive amount of propaganda and US body counts were no better than North Vietnam's claims. What is obvious is that the 2/7 Battalion was massacred. ("We were Soldiers Once" by Col Moore is one of the better books about the war.)
There were many other smaller battles where US troops got hammered.
25 Div, HoBo woods, (Near Tay Ninh) 57 casualties out of a Co of 92
1st Div, Xa Cam My, 109 out of a Co of 134
5th Mar, Op Union, 210 out of 3 Co (Good friend of mine survived this. They advanced across open rice paddies)
1st Mar, Go Noi, 924 out of 3 Battalions (50% casualties)
Hill 875, 173rd, 340 out of 570 who went up the hill
Hamburger Hill, 101st, 564 casualties. 60% in one Bn!!!
So I don't buy into the myth that we never lost a battle. We were subjected to huge propaganda claims by both sides. My personal experience: ARVN would not defend their own country. Viet Cong would only fight if they thought they outnumbered you, and then they would disappear as quickly as they appeared. They didn't wait around for the Phantoms or 155's to come rolling in. I have a lot of respect for their courage and fighting ability.
I had no contact with NVA. They were a well equipped and trained army and their leadership and tactics were as good as ours.
I think US Marines were and are the best trained soldiers and the world. They were not allowed to fight as a result of corrupt politicians and generals. Westmoreland should be buried in a prison graveyard full of former serial killers.
Any source for more info on Marines having their hands tied? Not doubting you, I just havent heard that before and I find Vietnam to be the most interesting/mysterious of Americas wars. Id like to learn more on this.
Thanks. And thank you guys for serving in a rougher time.
Mike
Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...