You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Southeast Asia
Fall of Saigon vietnam Symposium: Was the Vietnam War a mistake or fatal flaw in the system?
2025-05-11
[Responsible Statecraft] The photographs, television images and newspaper stories make it perfectly clear: there was an urgency, a frenzy even, as the U.S. Embassy in Saigon shuttered and its diplomats and staff were evacuated, along with other military, journalists, and foreigners, as well as thousands of Vietnamese civilians, who all wanted out of the country as the North Vietnamese victors rolled into the city center.

It was April 30, 1975 — 50 years ago today — yet the nightmare left behind that day only accentuated the failure of the United States, along with the South Vietnamese army, to resist a takeover by the communists under the leadership of the North. It was not only an extraordinarily bloody chapter for Vietnam (well over 1.5 million military and civilian deaths, depending on estimates, from 1965 to 1975), but a dark episode for America, too.

Beyond the failure of Washington’s Cold War policy — that intervening in Vietnam’s post-Colonial struggles for independence was necessary to prevent the "dominoes" of communism from tumbling across Southeast Asia — more than 55,000 Americans were killed. An untold number who returned suffered lifelong injuries, impacts of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and illnesses and other symptoms due to Agent Orange and other toxic exposures.

The nation had been ruptured politically and socially over the war, a divide that one could say has never really healed.

Yet ironically, Washington’s proclivity to intervene in other countries’ affairs and to use military power as the first resort has only grown. It would seem the true lessons of Vietnam were left on that iconic rooftop from which the last helicopter left Saigon 50 years ago.

Some say after WWII, U.S. power and intervention has always maintained the global liberal order and that Vietnam was a "mistake" — a one-off. Others say it was a sign that the pretense of America as the "indispensable nation" was folly from the beginning, that the Cold War had blinded us to the realities of the world and the limits of military intervention.

So we asked experts, both in geopolitics and history, what they think:

Was the failure of Vietnam a feature or a bug of U.S. foreign policy after WWII?
Posted by:Besoeker

#10  Embrace Bitcoin, B!

/sarc>
Posted by: Mullah Richard OTR   2025-05-11 19:10  

#9  /\ Yes, FDR took us off the "Standard." The paper dollar has been in steady decline ever since.
Posted by: Besoeker   2025-05-11 17:00  

#8  and Nixon took us off thegold standard

Only if he changed his name to Franklin Roosevelt and the Vietnam war was in 1933.
Posted by: Mullah Richard OTR   2025-05-11 16:47  

#7  out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem
Posted by: Grom the Affective   2025-05-11 14:30  

#6  Island Chains: Can the US's Cold War Strategy Still Contain China?
Posted by: Skidmark   2025-05-11 13:58  

#5  So is nobody going to mention that the South Vietnamese government were a gang of murderous thugs who created more communists than they ever killed?
All anyone had to do to bring a screeching halt to communism was give the workers a fair share of what they created with their own hands.
But no. That was too much. Open fire on those uppity deplorables and drive them straight into the arms of the world's most dangerous ideology.
Good plan, everyone.
Posted by: Jairong+Scourge+of+the+Gepids2435   2025-05-11 12:26  

#4  I still don't get what was so vitally imporant about Vietnam that we had to run the printing presses to pay for it and Nixon took us off thegold standard because we couldn'tafford the war.
Oh, and 50,000 good men dead.
And untold cultural damage done by being the obvious bad guys.
The good guys don't set children on fire with napalm.
Hamas does that.
Posted by: Jairong+Scourge+of+the+Gepids2435   2025-05-11 12:18  

#3  There are a lot of factors at play here, but i'd put in a vote for piss poor generalship. As far as I can tell our basic tactic at least before 1968 was: "The bad guys are somewhere over there. Walk your platoon in that direction until they shoot at you. Then we'll know where they are and we can bomb 'em." If we were going to do that, we should at least have had some generals walking point.
Posted by: Matt   2025-05-11 10:46  

#2  Vietnam followed Korea. In the 50s and 60s many felt we lost in Korea, however, looking at the night time satellite view of the place today shows who won. The objective of American intervention was to repel the invasion of the south. It was Syngman Rhee's intention of uniting the peninsular that resulting in the pursuit of North Korean forces to the Yalu and the resultant Chinese intervention. We were always fighting the last war.

The problem in Vietnam was that we never wanted to 'win'. Fear of Chinese intervention was always in the policy markers back mind. However, that is were it all existed. As time has shown, the Vietnamese and Chinese are not allied. Had they done early in the war what Nixon did at the end, bombing the crap out of them and sealing Haiphong harbor, it would have ended far quicker and earlier. Then there may have been the 'will' to actually back up the South Vietnamese government like we had the South Korean government, rather than allowing one party to cut their aid, assistant, and leave them to the mercy of the North.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2025-05-11 10:06  

#1  "Tony Poe's (Anthony Poshepny) CIA War" exploring regional involvement in the early 60's explains it pretty well.

The Secret War That Transformed the CIA

"America’s involvement in Laos began in the 1950s, when the United States started providing conventional military assistance to government forces fighting Laotian Communist insurgents who were backed by North Vietnam. Despite U.S. aid, the government army proved ineffective. Early in 1961, the Americans turned to a different strategy, arming and directing an irregular force of Hmong tribesmen (then commonly called Meo), a mountain tribe living in the Plain of Jars region in northern Laos. That plan was conceived and organized by Bill Lair, a CIA officer who had been based in Thailand for many years and knew the region well. The guerrillas were commanded by a Hmong officer in the Laotian army named Vang Pao."
Posted by: Besoeker   2025-05-11 08:48  

00:00