Article

2010-12-17 Afghanistan

Could there be a Tet Offensive in Afghanistan?

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2010-12-17 12:29|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top

#1 Tet sucked royally for our guys, who were caught by surprise because our leadership had been busily blabbing about how well we were doing and how the enemy was virtually finished. Then Hue etc. destroyed their credibility. As always, our soldiers quickly adapted, and by the time they were done Tet sucked a whole lot more for the VC than us. But none of it mattered, because we the people were told by our elite that we couldn't win, so instead we spent how many more lives trying to lose with honor. If it's not worth fighting to win, is it worth fighting at all? Regardless of anything about honor.

Posted by Glenmore 2010-12-17 12:50|| 2010-12-17 12:50|| Front Page Top

#2 The Tet Offensive won the war for the VC. Won't be necessary in Afghanistan. Obama has already declared his intentions of cut and run starting in 2011.

Posted by wr 2010-12-17 13:22|| 2010-12-17 13:22|| Front Page Top

#3 A hallmark of the Vietnam war that is seldom mentioned is that it is almost unique in modern war, because neither side would massively concentrate their forces.

When the North would try even a relatively small concentration, the US would use helicopters to transport a lot of personnel quickly for a counter-concentration.

The US learned early on (Battles of Ia Drang) that if it concentrated too many, it was just as vulnerable to a large scale attack on that concentration.

There has been some suggestion that the Viet Cong had become almost independent of the North, based on backing from either the Soviet Union or China, so the North egged them on to pulling Tet, as a win-win for the North, of either the VC taking over the South, or being wiped out in the process.

The bad blood between the Soviet backed North and China remained after the war, as seen in the invasion of Cambodia to displace the Maoist Khmer Rouge, or the head to head border fight with the Chinese army.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-12-17 13:58|| 2010-12-17 13:58|| Front Page Top

#4 Tet sucked royally for our guys

Tet is Lunar New Year. As somebody said, like Christmas, New Year's and your birthday all rolled into one. There was also a cease-fire in effect at the time, something that gets overlooked. As Dr. Steve points out, the VC not only lost but were no longer able to fight due to losses. Lucky for them, Walter Cronkite managed to spin it as an American defeat.

Posted by SteveS 2010-12-17 14:11|| 2010-12-17 14:11|| Front Page Top

#5 I suspect American troops and equipment are better now than during Tet although our faith in the local government is equally low and that's where Tet really hit us.

Posted by Rjschwarz 2010-12-17 14:27|| 2010-12-17 14:27|| Front Page Top

#6 Won battle. Lost war.

Posted by Highlander 2010-12-17 18:22|| 2010-12-17 18:22|| Front Page Top

#7 Won battle. Lost war.

I thought our armed forces won the war, then Congress threw away the peace?

Posted by trailing wife 2010-12-17 23:03|| 2010-12-17 23:03|| Front Page Top

#8 interesting that John F'n Kerry (D-Pretentious Asshole) has a place in both debacles. His history is one of anti-American political actions. We should make sure that future children learn his name along with Benedict Arnold, Jonathan Pollard, and the Rosenbergs

Posted by Frank G 2010-12-17 23:10|| 2010-12-17 23:10|| Front Page Top

00:03 Sherry
23:57 trailing wife
23:45 SteveS
23:37 SteveS
23:26 trailing wife
23:22 trailing wife
23:20 trailing wife
23:16 European Conservative
23:14 trailing wife
23:13 rammer
23:10 Frank G
23:03 trailing wife
22:57 gorb
22:56 newc
22:49 P2kontheroad
22:30 gorb
22:27 gorb
22:25 gorb
22:22 gorb
22:20 European Conservative
22:13 European Conservative
22:02 Rambler in Virginia
21:45 Adriane
21:45 Steven