Name a battle from each Name a battle from each war.war.

Am RevAm Rev Civil WarCivil War WWIWWI WWIIWWII VietnamVietnam Iraq/AfghanistanIraq/Afghanistan

Which option is each quote advocating?Which option is each quote advocating?

““Perhaps, [the most important move that we should take is], the Perhaps, [the most important move that we should take is], the introduction into the Pacific Theater massive forces to deal with any introduction into the Pacific Theater massive forces to deal with any escalatory response, including forces evidently aimed at China as well as escalatory response, including forces evidently aimed at China as well as North Vietnam, should the Chinese Communists enter the game…..At North Vietnam, should the Chinese Communists enter the game…..At this stage of history we are the greatest power in the world – if we this stage of history we are the greatest power in the world – if we behave like it.”behave like it.”

““This is not the last inning in the struggle against communism. We must This is not the last inning in the struggle against communism. We must pick those spots where the stakes are highest for us and we have the pick those spots where the stakes are highest for us and we have the greatest ability to prevail. I don’t believe we can win in Vietnam. If we greatest ability to prevail. I don’t believe we can win in Vietnam. If we lose 50,000 men it will ruin us. Five years, billions of dollars, 50,000 lose 50,000 men it will ruin us. Five years, billions of dollars, 50,000 men – it is not for us.”men – it is not for us.”

““The central lesson of our time is that the appetite of aggression is never The central lesson of our time is that the appetite of aggression is never satisfied….The contest in Vietnam is part of a wider pattern of satisfied….The contest in Vietnam is part of a wider pattern of aggressive purpose.”aggressive purpose.”

““The South Vietnamese are losing the war to the Viet Cong….No one has The South Vietnamese are losing the war to the Viet Cong….No one has demonstrated that a white ground force of whatever size can win a demonstrated that a white ground force of whatever size can win a guerrilla war – which is at the same time a civil war between Asians – in guerrilla war – which is at the same time a civil war between Asians – in jungle terrain in the midst of a population that refuses cooperation to the jungle terrain in the midst of a population that refuses cooperation to the white forces (and the South Vietnamese)…”white forces (and the South Vietnamese)…”

What are 3 rules of war? What are 3 rules of war?

Should there even be rules of war?Should there even be rules of war?

Rules of Engagement of Organized Rules of Engagement of Organized Butchery?Butchery?

We were fighting in the cruelest kind of conflict, a people’s war. It was no We were fighting in the cruelest kind of conflict, a people’s war. It was no orderly campaign as in Europe, but a war for survival waged in a wilderness orderly campaign as in Europe, but a war for survival waged in a wilderness without rules or laws; a war in which each soldier fought for his own life and without rules or laws; a war in which each soldier fought for his own life and the lives of the men beside him, not caring how he killed in that personal the lives of the men beside him, not caring how he killed in that personal cause or how many or in what manner and feeling only contempt for those cause or how many or in what manner and feeling only contempt for those who sought to impose on his savage struggle the mincing distinctions of who sought to impose on his savage struggle the mincing distinctions of civilized warfare – that code of battlefield ethics that attempted to civilized warfare – that code of battlefield ethics that attempted to humanize an essentially inhuman war. According to those rules of humanize an essentially inhuman war. According to those rules of engagement, it was morally right to shoot an unarmed Vietnamese who was engagement, it was morally right to shoot an unarmed Vietnamese who was running, but wrong to shoot one who was standing or walking; it was wrong running, but wrong to shoot one who was standing or walking; it was wrong to shoot an enemy prisoner at close range, but right for a sniper at long to shoot an enemy prisoner at close range, but right for a sniper at long range to kill an enemy soldier who was no more able than a prisoner to range to kill an enemy soldier who was no more able than a prisoner to defend himself; it was wrong for infantrymen to destroy a village with white defend himself; it was wrong for infantrymen to destroy a village with white phosphorus grenades, but right for a fighter pilot to drop napalm on it. phosphorus grenades, but right for a fighter pilot to drop napalm on it. Ethics seemed to be a matter of distance and technology. You could never Ethics seemed to be a matter of distance and technology. You could never go wrong killing people at long range with sophisticated weapons.go wrong killing people at long range with sophisticated weapons. And then And then there was that inspiring order issued by General Green: kill VC. In the there was that inspiring order issued by General Green: kill VC. In the patriotic fervor of the Kennedy years, we asked, “What can we do for our patriotic fervor of the Kennedy years, we asked, “What can we do for our country?” and our country answered, “Kill VC.” That was the strategy, the country?” and our country answered, “Kill VC.” That was the strategy, the best our military minds could come up with: organized butchery. But best our military minds could come up with: organized butchery. But organized or not, butchery was butchery, so who was to speak of rules and organized or not, butchery was butchery, so who was to speak of rules and ethics in a war that had none.”ethics in a war that had none.”

How did we fight the Vietnam How did we fight the Vietnam War?War?

1955-64 1955-64 “Advisory” Role“Advisory” Role

Train/fund ARVN so they fight commiesTrain/fund ARVN so they fight commies• 1961-65 1961-65 CounterinsurgencyCounterinsurgency

small unit, spec forces – infiltrate enemysmall unit, spec forces – infiltrate enemy 1965-1969 1965-1969 EscalationEscalation of ground forces of ground forces

70,000 to 550,000 troops along with bombing, 70,000 to 550,000 troops along with bombing, counterinsurgencycounterinsurgency

1969-1973 1969-1973 VietnamizationVietnamization

Train ARVN to fight while getting ground troops Train ARVN to fight while getting ground troops out; INCREASE BOMBINGout; INCREASE BOMBING

Military Situation in VietnamMilitary Situation in Vietnam

““American troops had to adapt to the unique conditions American troops had to adapt to the unique conditions of the Vietnam battlefield. of the Vietnam battlefield. Unlike WWII or Korea, the Unlike WWII or Korea, the Vietnam conflict was a frontless warVietnam conflict was a frontless war. There were no . There were no territorial objectives to be taken. There was no vital territorial objectives to be taken. There was no vital center of enemy resistance to be destroyed; center of enemy resistance to be destroyed; all of South all of South Vietnam was a fluid battlefieldVietnam was a fluid battlefield…Battles occurred over …Battles occurred over the entire country. They could occur whenever and the entire country. They could occur whenever and wherever the VC or PAVN [NVA] forces picked a fight. wherever the VC or PAVN [NVA] forces picked a fight. They could occur in remote, sparsely populated They could occur in remote, sparsely populated highlands or they could occur amid the populous delta highlands or they could occur amid the populous delta and coastal regions. and coastal regions. The American objective in these The American objective in these sporadic encounters was to attrite as many of the sporadic encounters was to attrite as many of the enemy as possible while using their superior air mobility enemy as possible while using their superior air mobility and firepower to minimize their own casualtiesand firepower to minimize their own casualties.”.”

Now we get Now we get serious!serious!

Escalation and CombatEscalation and Combat

War of attrition War of attrition – kill them faster than they can replenish– kill them faster than they can replenish

1. 1. Search and DestroySearch and Destroy

2. Destroy villages friendly to enemy2. Destroy villages friendly to enemy

““No villages, no guerillas: simple.”No villages, no guerillas: simple.”

Free fire zonesFree fire zones

3. Air War/Bombing campaigns3. Air War/Bombing campaigns

Vietnam becomes a QUAGMIRE!Vietnam becomes a QUAGMIRE!

How do you know if you’re How do you know if you’re winning?winning?

Body CountBody CountDead and Vietnamese Dead and Vietnamese = VC= VCCaptured weapon = Captured weapon =

5 VC5 VC““For every Am we lost, For every Am we lost, we killed 13 NVAs”we killed 13 NVAs”Inflated counts, Inflated counts, inexact, pressure to inexact, pressure to succeedsucceed

Air War and PacificationAir War and Pacification

Air War – break enemy’s willAir War – break enemy’s will

end capacity to make warend capacity to make war

stop flow of suppliesstop flow of supplies• Pacification – The Phoenix Program Pacification – The Phoenix Program

Propaganda to cause defection from Propaganda to cause defection from VCVC

Covert ops to destroy enemy Covert ops to destroy enemy

infrastructure in SVinfrastructure in SV

List two problems facing South List two problems facing South Vietnam in the early to mid 1960s.Vietnam in the early to mid 1960s.

Develop a solution to one of those Develop a solution to one of those problems.problems.