"Ia Drang – The Battle That Convinced Ho Chi Minh..." Topic

… He Could Win.

"What happened there, in the Ia Drang Valley, 17 miles from the nearest red-dirt road at Plei Me and 37 miles from the provincial capital of Pleiku, sounded alarm bells in the Johnson White House and the Pentagon as they tallied the American losses—a stunning butcher's bill of 234 men killed and more than 250 wounded in just four days and nights, November 14-17, in two adjacent clearings dubbed Landing Zones X-ray and Albany. Another 71 Americans had been killed in earlier, smaller skirmishes that led up to the Ia Drang battles.

To that point, some 1,100 Americans in total had died in the United States' slow-growing but ever-deepening involvement in South Vietnam, most of them by twos and threes in a war where Americans were advisers to the South Vietnamese battalions fighting Viet Cong guerrillas. Now the North Vietnamese Army had arrived off the Ho Chi Minh Trail and had made itself felt. In just over one month, 305 American dead had been added to the toll from the Ia Drang fight alone. November 1965 was the deadliest month yet for the Americans, with 545 killed.

The North Vietnamese regulars, young men who had been drafted into the military much as the young American men had been, had paid a much higher price to test the newcomers to an old fight: an estimated 3,561 of them had been killed, and thousands more wounded, in the 34-day Ia Drang campaign.

What happened when the American cavalrymen and the People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) collided head-on in the Ia Drang had military and civilian leaders in Washington, Saigon and Hanoi scrambling to assess what it meant, and what had been learned.

Both sides understood that the war had changed suddenly and dramatically in those few days. At higher levels, both sides claimed victory in the Ia Drang, although those who fought and bled and watched good soldiers die all around them were loath to use so grand a word for something so tragic and terrible that would people their nightmares for a long time, or a lifetime.

The big battles began when then–Lt. Col. Hal Moore, a 43-year-old West Point graduate out of Bardstown, Ky., was given orders to airlift his 450-man 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, into the valley on a search-and-destroy mission. He did a cautious aerial reconnaissance by helicopter and selected a football field–sized clearing at the base of the Chu Pong Massif, a 2,401-foot-high piece of ground that stretched to the Cambodian border and beyond for several miles. The sketchy American intelligence Moore was provided said the area was home base for possibly a regiment of the enemy. In fact, there were three North Vietnamese Army regiments within an easy walk of that clearing, or the equivalent of a division of very good light infantry soldiers…"
More here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Ho and his crew knew. That all they had to do is hang in there. And not "lose". Continue to inflict losses on the US/SEATO. No matter what it cost the VC and NVA. And sooner or later the US/SEATO will leave and go back home. Like the French did a decade before.

AGree.

Amicalement
Armand

This map says it all.

One of Westmoreland's brighter young aides later would write, "a strategy of attrition is proof that you have no strategy at all."

Indeed. He had no real strategy when he was told he couldn't go after and cut the trail. Attrition was all that was left.

link

By 1966, Westmoreland had begun to consider Khe Sanh as part of a larger strategy. ‘I still hoped some day to get approval for a major drive into Laos to cut the Ho Chi Minh Trail,' he said, ‘in which case I would need Khe Sanh as the base for the operation.' In a meeting with Lt. Gen. Lewis Walt, commander of III Marine Amphibious Force (MAF), Westmoreland said that he placed great strategic importance on Khe Sanh. He believed it was absolutely essential to hold the base, which explains why he then ordered Marines there. In September 1966 MACV began detailed planning for an invasion into Laos, and an airfield was built at Khe Sanh in October.

link

I studied/wargamed the war in detail, and often. With micromanagement and the restrictions, etc., placed on the US military, there were really no other opinions.

We did learn from this, and in GWI the politicians, 1000s of miles away let the military do their job. You could say the same about the Invasion of A'stan shortly after 9/11.

But with GWII(and even Somalia), some of the old habits by the politicos crept in. And continued with the other elected and appointed civilian leadership. In hindsight, GWII was an error. And compounded with the early withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, etc. Which certainly greatly contributed to what is happening in the region today. Some would say this trend continues as I type this. I'm one of them.

We learned a lot of lessons from the War in SE Asia. Especially with Infantry ops, Air Assault tactics, etc., … The military studied and remembered most if not all of those lessons. But the elected leadership didn't, if they knew anything about those lesson learned at all. Compounding this with a tendency to disregard much of the advice of the military. Hopefully this trend will change.

Dream on until your dream comes true.

I hope it will as well, I am tired of 1 armed and 1 legged guys next door.

"In hindsight, GWII was an error"

I and several million people, from Hans Blix and the UN Weapons Inspection teams, down to the person-on-the-street, knew at the time it was an error.

And we were quite vocal about it. And ignored. Ah well, hindsight's 20/20 and all that… shame about all the dead and injured and ISIS and the ruination of Iraq and Syria.

Yes, it was well known that many thought it was a bad idea. Even some of the Generals. But when the POTUS, etc., orders troops off to war. They took an oath to follow [lawful/legal] orders. Failing to follow those orders is mutiny, treason, etc., Whatever the JAG wants to call it.

As I said, GWII was error. Resulting in among other things the birth/rise of Daesh. As you posted …

all the dead and injured and ISIS and the ruination of Iraq and Syria.

Along with Badger's post …

I hope it will as well, I am tired of 1 armed and 1 legged guys next door.

The seeds for this conflict and some others in the Mid East. Started with the UK/French division of the region after WWI. Add to that the Sunni-Shia internal conflict. It was just a matter of time.

The first step, IMO, to the path of the hatred, etc., of the US by many moslems/arabs was after the Arab-Israeli '48 War. With the US supporting Israel and as well as after that.

As I have posted often [to some's dismay] … The US made a number of errors in that past few decades.

1) Supporting the Muj vs the USSR.

2) GWII
2a. Withdrawal of US troops too soon.

And I believe the US-Iran "nuc" deal was a huge error. Which hopefully with the less idealistic and unrealistic US leadership. It will be "fixed". And do it without a "hot" war coming about.