|
We are happy to announce open registration on the KG forums has begun! Welcome everyone! |
View Poll Results: What Would You Do In '68? | |||
Launch a WWII-esque Massive Bombing Campaign to Knock the North into the Stone Age. | 7 | 41.18% | |
Invade Cambodia & Laos on a Large Scale. | 0 | 0% | |
Invade North Vietnam on a Large Scale. | 1 | 5.88% | |
Invade Cambodia, Laos & North Vietnam on a Large Scale. | 2 | 11.76% | |
Other. Tell us your plans. | 7 | 41.18% | |
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll |
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
I'd stopping trying to win guerrilla warfare with conventional tactics.
I would use the same tactics that the VC were using, only I would have used American technology and fire power to augment the ambushes and tactics. The American soldier is the best trained, best equipted fighting man in the world, he just needs the right training, the right tools and the right leadership to do the job. Scrap the WWII tactics along with the piece of crap M-16 which should have never went into production, instead give the troops the highly sucessful M-14 in 30-06 or 308 Win the support of the people: I think the average Vietnamse farmer, and most of them were farmers, could have cared less who won, they just wanted not to be fucked with contstantly by both sides and a corrupt puppet goverment that was stealing them blind. For further reading on these highly sucessful tactics read the book: "Reluctant Warrior" by Michael C. Hodgins USMC ret. ISBN 0-8041-1120-0 1st class reading
__________________
Last edited by KG_Swampfox; 09-23-2006 at 10:59 PM.. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Tactical nuke the north until China joined the fray then tactical nuke the Chinese as they pour into Vietnam, Posleen style. Once N. Vietnam looked like a moonscape, make a left hook through Cambodia and Laos to knock out any VC camps, pull back and set up concertina wire 13 miles thick laced with bouncing betties along the border. Not even the ARVN could screw that up. That's how you stop the spread of communism. That and not electing Democrats. Politically unsavory but effective.
__________________
"Besides, the atheist non-god is not going to send me to non-hell for my lapse of non-faith if it should turn out that I am mistaken." - John C. Wright |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
At the risk of upsetting a few people, which is not my intention, when i started this poll, i asked a simple question, "What would you do......" Not what are you personal feelings about the real war, not what are your political feelings about the real war. I asked a Hypotetical question about a Hypothetical situation. I dont know why some of you guys always insist on reading between the lines and not answering the questions i ask. Im just a little frustrated is all im trying to say.
__________________
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
@Frank,
In my opinion, No the U.S. does not nor have they ever had the obligation to stop the spread of communism or any other type of government. @ Kent, when you ask questions that are as complex as what to do in Vietnam in 68 and leave a "open other option"we are going to get pretty deep into almost every angle possible. No need to be frustrated just roll with it and enjoy the debate.
__________________
Let us cross over the river and rest under the shade of the trees... |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
I recall reading that very early Ho Chi Minh was open to the West and we could have brought him into the fold vs. following the French...
Please do not forget the amount of $$ we spent on the war effort diverted our resources from out NUKE programs allowing Russia to catch up. Read a Bright Shining Lie - good read - not anti-war IMHO but outlines various mistakes that cost us... On the other hand for those of you whom elected BOMBING THEM TO HELL that might of worked as well :)
__________________
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
The "Other Option" you speak of was for another military plan that was not listed above. As i told Mark in an earlier post in this thread, you were not hired to be the Secretary of State or the Embassador to the U.N. Further more i dont remember asking anyone for their personal opinions/political views either. All i wanted was your answer to my hypothetical question about a hypothetical what if military situation, thats all. You were hired to find a military answer to winning the war. Thats what i wrote and thats what i assumed to be anwsered, go figure, silly me.
__________________
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Packing up and leaving IS a military option
__________________
Let us cross over the river and rest under the shade of the trees... |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
No, that would be a political option. Military options are only that when in the context of conflict.
__________________
"Besides, the atheist non-god is not going to send me to non-hell for my lapse of non-faith if it should turn out that I am mistaken." - John C. Wright |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
No Rob withdrawl is a Military option, you just chose to see it only as political.
And since we are talking about a war to stop the spread of a "political system"(communism) and one in which most if not all "military descisions" came from the White House how is it possible to consider anything about Vietnam non-political?
__________________
Let us cross over the river and rest under the shade of the trees... Last edited by KG_SSpoom; 09-24-2006 at 11:28 AM.. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Like Frank, I don't know much about Vietnam. Certainly not enough to have an opinion regarding military strategy. However, of the options provided bombing them into ruin would be my gut reaction. I just don't know if N. Vietnam was sufficiently industrialized to get good payback from the huge investment.
To be honest, most of what I do know is from the audio book "Up Country" (by Nelson Demille) that I listened to a few years ago. A very good book, but probably lacking in historical authenticity. |
|
|