We must dispense with a dangerous myth. In an effort to pressure the president to send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan, armchair commanders have dusted off the old canard that "we could have won in Vietnam if only … " Some revisionists contend we could have won "if only" Congress had not balked at the military's insatiable hunger for more troops and more bombing. Others argue that pacification of the countryside and training of Vietnamese soldiers could have carried the day "if only" we had stuck with these policies longer. Still others argue that we could have won "if only" President Johnson had made a much stronger American commitment when he first decided to send combat troops in 1965.
He is serious. Newsweek is surely the place for a man of his many delusions.
Is anybody seriously considering taking this man's advice on military manners? I'm not sure I'd take his advice on riverine warfare with small craft. Advice on spandex fitting protocols for water sports? Oui. But not much else. Sadly, he was listened to back in the day (AP photo from the linked article).
God help us all. Beware the officer who turns on his own military.
Listen up, LT. I won't speak for all so-called revisionists, but as for me, I don't claim we could have won the Vietnam War but for men like Kerry who made sure we'd lose, I argue we did win.
Only our failure to support an independent RVN from the NVA invasion after we'd left lost us the war, and condemned millions to live under brutal communist rule or die trying to escape by sea.
That's right, Senator Kerry, to put it in terms even you can understand, we actually won the war before you lost it. Thanks a lot.
UPDATE: The honorable senator might start here if he wants to understand the war he served in.
