Mapping the world's opinions

About us Style guide Log in  |  Sign up

Opinion map

History
International Relations
Politics
Vietnam was an undeniable failure for the United States government. Despite expending more than $141 billion, and 56,000 American lives, the world’s largest military superpower was unable to achieve its sole strategic objective: to prevent Vietnam from falling under communist control. Historians are deeply divided over the reasons that led to US defeat. Most attribute the loss to several factors that each played a role. This topic offers an overview of those factors, with careful consideration of the evidence that both supports and refutes each claim as a viable reason for defeat.

Positions

Arguments supporting this position

Details

Context

The communist forces learnt the importance of guerrilla warfare during the First Indochina War against the French. At the battle of Dien Bien Phu, General Giap had led his communist forces against the French colonisers. The communists won, but when they employed traditional warfare strategies, the communists suffered heavy casualties. During the Giap unleashed a “human wave” at French positions incurring vast losses.[1] Giap learnt the lessons from the First Indochina War. He knew that to defeat a larger military power, his forces could not engage them in traditional warfare strategies. He took these lessons to the Vietnam War and they shaped the strategies he employed against the US forces.

The Argument

After 1965, Ho Chi Minh and General Giap, the leaders of the North Vietnamese communist forces, made the decision to avoid pitch battles at all costs. The adopted hit-and-run ambush tactics. The NLF and Vietcong built an extensive network of tunnels which were used as fighting bases. They put the local villagers to work. Each villager had a quota. They had to dig three feet of tunnels a day. One of the most extensive tunnel networks is clearly visible at Cu Chi. The network consists of nearly 200 miles of tunnels, including an underground conference room, kitchens, and a training area. Hidden trapdoors connected the tunnels with the surface and provided ample opportunities to ambush patrolling US platoons. These guerrilla tactics meant that the US rarely had the upper hand in Vietnam. US forces could not match the Vietcong’s combat skills in dense jungle terrain. Nor could it neutralise their ambushes.

Counter arguments

The body counts and kill ratios show that the US forces consistently won skirmishes with the communists. At the battle of Ia Drang, after three days of fighting, the allied US and South Vietnamese forces lost around 600 men. The communists had lost around 3,000.[2] During the Tet Offensive, one of the pivotal battles of the Vietnam War, the Northern Vietnamese forces suffered losses of around 50,000, compared to the US and ARVN losses of 2,000 and 4,000 respectively.

Premises

The communist forces used an unconventional guerrilla style of fighting that the US forces could not contend with. The war was fought on the communists' terms, neutralising the technological advantages of the US forces.

Rejecting the premises

Enter the technical rejections of the premises here ...

References

  1. http://as.ucpress.edu/content/17/9/857
  2. https://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Vietnam-documentary-a-compelling-look-at-war-12277513.php

Proponents

Your take

Do you agree?

Sign up or log in to record your thoughts on this argument

Next step

Explore the next argument

This page was last edited on Monday, 17 Sep 2018 at 15:00 UTC