Look at all of the people complaining about the quality of this documentary. It's called *Battlefield* Vietnam, meaning that it focuses on the war itself and its battles and campaigns. It is not a documentary made to focus and apologize about the actions of the U.S. military in the Vietnam War, nor is it made to condemn its involvement. It's made for those of us who wish to learn about how the war played out, and _not for those of you who wish to see a video confirming your political views._ I believe the first season does not focus on the Holocaust either, but it focuses on the battles of the Second World War, because you know, it's *Battlefield*. Thank you
Thank you !!! These bleeding heart leftist drive me insane. They always forget to tell about the VC slaughtering civilians perfect example is in hue where the VC and nva killed thousands of innocent people
@@enlightenedwarrior7119 I think you missed the point. The documentary is not talking about the crimes commited by the US forces either. It is Battlefield. They concentrate on the battles and strategies. btw, there is no war, where civilians were not slughtered.
The thing that strikes me the most about Tet in Saigon, and I have read a lot, is that despite all the planning, the amazing tenacity and the guts shown by the communists, the south didn't rise up against the Americans. The government held firm because they had support. Imagine 3 brigades of government soldiers surrounded by multiple divisions of VC, it would have been so easy for them to just give up and turn over and yet they fought tooth and nail against the communists with little American support. I don't want to argue politics but there were many South Vietnamese that didn't want to be communists.
Ich denke, dass es eher so war: Auf dem Land war man eher für Charly und in der Stadt eher neutral oder leicht Pro-Südvietnam da die US-Armee auch wirtschaftlich für großen Aufschwung sorgte in den Städten und Ortschaften die sich nahe den US-Basen bildeten, jedoch haben die Vietcong durch Prostitution und Drogentransport (darin war man ja eh Meister im heimlichen Transport) nach Südvietnam leider auch nicht wenig von diesem Geld abgezweigt, Was die Bauern angeht war es die überwältigende Schuld der US-Planer, da man ja viele Bauern zwangsweise umgesiedelt hat, ohne Kenntnis oder Beachtung ihrer Traditionen (die ganzen toten Vorfahren sind in der Regel im Dorf oder sogar direkt neben der eigenen Behausung begraben, ist eben eine andere Kultur). Die US-Armee hat dann glaub ich sogar noch vor dem Eintreffen der ersten Bodentruppen diese mittelalterlichen "Schutzdörfer" eingerichtet mit irgendwelchen Brücken und Wassergräben die herabgelassen werden mussten um das Dorf zu betreten, sicherlich eine gute Verteidigung, wenn Charly denn vietnamesische Bauerndörfer angegriffen hätte im großen Stil... die Ernte war dennoch außerhalb dieser "Burgdörfer" und die Bürger waren sehr sehr unzufrieden auch wenn sie dort erstmals moderne Medizin usw. erhielten, praktisch keiner wollte umziehen... die Zwangsumsiedlung war kein "Winning hearts and minds"... eher losing hearts and minds of the farmers und stärkte damit die Rekrutenzahl des Vietcong massiv... dazu die Tatsache, dass die Armee erst ab 20 zum Wehrdienst einzog, während der Vietcong sich schon die jungen Leute ab 16 (meist freiwillig) geholt hat... 20 in einem Land mit eher junger Bevölkerung und in Kriegszeiten ist doch völlig idiotisch, vorallem wenn dadurch der Feind noch gestärkt wird... man hätte ja sowas wie ein Soziales Jahr ab 16 einführen können, alles in Wohnortnähe ohne Zwangsumsiedlung...das war den Leuten wichtig! Dann die jungen Leute schon mit 14-15 in Jugendorganisationen oder Schulen wenn möglich einzubinden, jedoch so, dass sie in der Familie immer noch ausreichend bei der Ernte helfen könnten wie seit Jahrhunderten üblich. Der Reis hätte von den USA für einen guten Preis direkt aufgekauft werden sollen, das wäre nur wenig wenn man pro Tonne +33% mehr zahlt oder so... damit wäre der Norden gezwungen gewesen auch Nahrung zu schmuggeln. So kam der Vietcong+ die NVA-Einheiten die sich den Guerillas angeschlossen haben mit knapp über 2.000 Tonnen (Munition/Waffen) täglich aus um den Kampf in GANZ Südvietnam wie gewohnt zu führen. Mehr war natürlich besser, aber notfalls reichte das eben weil die Truppen durch Reis aus Südivetnam ernährt wurden... Bei den Amis waren es glaub ich über 200.000 Tonnen? Die damals weltgrößten Frachtschiffe pendelten zwischen den USA und Südivetnam her, ich glaub höchstens Treibstoff kam zu einem gewissen Teil vom persischen Golf. Wie in dieser Doku gesagt, gab es ca. 80.000 verschiedene Artikel für die US-Truppen in Vietnam und erstmals kamen Computer in einem Krieg in Logistikzentren zum Einsatz. Der Vietcong brauchte vlt. 30-50 verschiedene Schmuggelgüter, paar unterschiedliche Kaliber Munition/Waffen und Ersatzteile für jene sowie etwas Propaganda-Material. Um das durchzusetzen hätte die Südvietnamesische Armee auch Gebiete mit hoher Dorfdichte "beschützen" sollen, denn mittelfristig hätte es mehr gebracht als Kämpfe. Weniger Vietcongs und mehr Rekruten für die Südvietnamesische Armee nach einer gewissen Anlaufzeit des Programms. Für den typischen Ami (~1965 rum) schwer zu verstehen der sich irgendwo ein Haus kaufte und dorthin zog und notfalls irgendwann (durch Trennung/Scheidung?) in ein neues Haus zog hunderte oder gar tausende Kilometer entfernt wieso die Bauern nicht umziehen wollten bzw wieso es ihnen sogar heilig war, aber dafür gibt es doch Kulturexperten die sich auf so etwas spezialisieren, auch bei der Army... oder zumindest hätte man diese einige Szenarien bewerten lassen können.
Adam Smith Actually the communists initially had a lot of support. But they fucked up when they started arresting teachers, priests, people who worked in the government, police officers, etc and started killing them all left, right, and center. When word of what they were doing spread in South Vietnam, all support evaporated during Tet.
this is a great series..I am studying more about this war right now and this has Really helped me to understand the battlefields..how things worked in the military etc..THANK YOU FOR POSTING THESE!!
I first learned about the city of Hue in the 1996 game Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego, I learned about a mausoleum in the old part of the city. I’ve also been to Hue City during the Tet Offensive in Call of Duty Black Ops 2.
Uncle was killed here. Marine David L. Collins. He was guiding the tank in the street. Took several hits before he fell. I never got to meet him. But still is loved and missed by friends and family 😔
There a various positive aspects to the Tet Offensive that are unfortunately overlooked or ignored by many who have taken an interest in undestanding the Vietnam War. One example is the efforts of the 716th Military Police Battalion at the US Embassy and their overall defense of Saigon during the opening phases of Tet. The 716th were the only US forces available in the Capital, as most US Combat forces were deployed throughout the countryside hunting down NLF and NVA forces.
The Americans had two choices to win the War. Deploy a much larger actual combat force - field combat. Or use Atomic Bombs. They were very close to using them. But there were worries that it would draw China and Russia into the conflict if they were used. The Americans chose a tactical retreat. Losing 50,000 men is mind blowing.
lairdriver Another very effective option would be: Ground operations into Laos and Cambodia, like the American general staff in the Pentagon asked for 208,000 additional soldiers (50% as combat troops and 50% as a reserve) for such operations. "Charly" had extreme good camouflage-skills and the border areas had a very very low population density, most area was jungle, a few paths without asphalt and maybe some small villages/farmers with their fields... a massive ground offensive would hit charly with such surprise like TeT hit the USA and the Vietcong had extreme large depots in Laos and Cambodia border Area, as seens in (I think) 1971, when South Vietnamese Units were flown in by American Helicopters to capture a City, already within the first 10 miles in Cambodia they found large hidden supplies. Another thing I do not get: Hill fights, why did they not hold the hills with smaller units and patrouls around to make sure the Hills would not get hit with mortars and artillery..especially in the Central Highlands and in the mountainous North the Hills were very strategic important. The UN-Coalition in the Afghanistan War (2001-2015) also created many such outposts in most regions in Afghanistan. The Soviet Union did this too in their Afghanistan conflict until 1989. If the hills were hold for a longer time they could be fortified a bit to withstand smaller artillery/mortar shells inside the commando bunkers and in the trenches and they could block important, maybe even the only road to another location, the Question of how strong these Hills should be is a difficult one...not enough soldiers and their would not be enough men for the needed patrouls outside the hill, but with many hills and over 100, or even a lot more on larger hills, would need a very large amount of troops. Of course evacuation plans with helicopters should be worked out if the Vietcong would try to overrun such outposts with over 1,000 troops in many waves and with mortar/artillery support... I know the SU lost the War in Afghanistan, or lets say they retreated same as US in Vietnam after ~15.000 soviet casualties, but the men were not important for the Soviets, the loss of their "HIND" helicopters and many modern jet fighters was the reason, the war became to expensive and the Soviet Air Force was really exhausted in February 1989 when the last Soviet troops withdraw, also the convois to supply the hills made the mistake to drive in a convoi in an area with only 1 small road and with some slow vehicles in the convois, and all the convois unit can only drive as fast as the slowest unit in it, tanks drove 20km/h or so in moar convois, giving the "Mullahs" enough time to bring weapons and attack the convoi, and than the convoi was trapped without possible retreat, in the first year the HIND-Helicopters securing the convois hit the Mullahs hard in such cases, but with the anti-air rockets everything changed, Hill outposts in the Vietnam would would have reduced the mobility of the Vietcong and villages in the range of the Hills would not be able to support the Guerillas so easy or at least the American would exactly know in which villages the Vietcong did get food and other stuff and often the Vietcong hide their weapons in the villages in secret places under the houses or so, easier than creating a large hole in the jungle and hide it...
lairdriver When was the US close to nuking Hanoi?? That's the first I've heard of it. How much more of a combat force would have achieved "total" victory?? The US had 600,000 troops in South Vietnam. These soldiers were not their to invade North Vietnam but to protect the south from invasion. The Vietnamese soldier, north or south is regarded as one of the greatest fighters in the history of military conflict. Vietnam went to war with China almost immediately after the Vietnam War ended and even the chinese were like, I'm outta here.
+lairdriver no. militarily they did the right things. the problem was they didn't implement reforms(or at least didn't force the south gredy corrupt leadership), strengthening the south vietnamese population's resolve in the war against the north. also vietnamization also should've been implemented earlier.
+lairdriver the american army won the battles. but the south vietnamese leaders choose to enrich themselves rather than strengthening their position among the people and solidify the ARVN. when the NVA attacked in 73, there were only about 50 american combat troops in south vietnam
These documentary videos sure do turn what we are normally told about Vietnam War on its head. The Tet I was always taught as a VC success, not a disaster.
Tactically Tet was of course, a failure. The usual lop-sided casualty figures vs. American and ARVN losses showed that not only did the NVA take huge losses the VC took even worse casualties than that. But the war was of such a nature and the North Vietnams such a ruthless enemy, mere numbers of dead never weakened communist resolve to keep fighting. Leaders at the very top like Giap and Le Duan seemed to barely notice their own losses and certainly never changed tactics in fear of greater ones - Tet was proof enough of that.
And yes, I suppose in retrospect the TET offensive was the turning point in the war. From that point on it became an unwinnable war (politicaly and among the public) and the emphasis was on "withdrawal" better know as 'peace with honor'. Which was neither peace for South Vietnam, nor honor for the troops who had fought there.
You've probably already had your presentation, but in case you still care: While the Ted-Offensive was a major (not complete) military failure that left especially the NLF weakened in South Vietnam, it was a political victory for the communists. Many Americans were shocked that after years of promises for a quick victory, the NLF was able to perform a huge offensive. As the Americans lost faith in the campaign, the White House was forced to negociate in a disadvantaged position. Hope it helped!
Did I hear that right at 28:16? "The American 199th light infantry brigade defending Long Binh was attacked by a mechanized reserve which hit the flank of the Viet Cong attacking Bien Hoa"?
No one told America to get involved, the French even told them not to bother but they wouldn't listen and they got themselves in a far bigger mess than the French who where there
Those who were current on the war differed on what the turning point was. That varied from many in the public today who believed it was always winnable and blamed the loss on the media (and never learned a thing, prompting them to believe a war on a word, describing a tactic -terror- can be possible too). At the other end was LBJ and macnamara who both believed it wasn't winnable, even before they deployed troops there. The tape of LBJ saying the war was "a real loser" in 1965 is astounding!
@@blueocean-me1ns No! The Americans told the French Since you did such a bad job, We're taking over!......(GO, LEAVE, GET OUT TA HERE!)..........And the rest is history.
@@whutdatytopsy9651 WRONG! Guess you missed it where their last battle with the Vietcong and the VC wiped-out hundreds of French soldiers and then the French got out of Vietnam learn your history..
@@blueocean-me1ns , Nope, didn't miss anything! You need to really read between the lines. The vietnamese got their support from China while billions were being poured in (courtesy of the Americans) supplying the French. Of course, nuclear weapon was off the table. Since the French did a LOUSY job, the Americans took over! What part of history didn't you not understand?
The US can win the war, if full-scale campaign and expansion is achieved. Yet, it is prevented to avoid the spark of another "World War". The US is in a strange position with superior firepower, but they had many limitations. You can't win a war without the good public relations.
I think it kind of has a depressing tone to me. When you watch the rest of the series on WW2, the music is dramatic but upbeat (like "we're paying a heavy price, but we'll get through this."). Bur Battlefield Vietnam's theme conveys a feeling of effort without reward and pointless sacrifice.
@qawwss2000: What else should Vietnam have done? The promise of Emperor Mao to defend the North with the might of China was enough for them to peruse this war to the bitter end and the alternative would have been a disastrous national partition and the same grievous fate which Korea suffers up to this day; not to mention that China can devour two feuding Vietnamese states far easier than an united and strong one.
The U.S. should have put in a much larger fighting force and "quarantined" the South, creating a line across most of the Laos border and force the North to march supplies much further South. Then swing this border northward and create a line stretching across Vietnam and Laos. Make the NVA walk 1000 miles if they want to get supplies to the South. This would've given time to strengthen the South and reduces cases of insurgency.
Anyone knows the street where the American GIs got ambushed and a number KIA @24:15 ? I have beeb wondering all throughout the years where it was. Just part of history to be known and remembered. Thanks.
You might be interested in "Casualties of the Vietnam war" on Wikipedia. You will find some very intersting numbers as to who killed who. Please note, the US isn't listed as the numbers never made the finle tally. If you read the complete analysis by Rummel, you may even find the US numbers he gives high.
Correction: In Late 1965 around 21 tons a day from the North was enough for Vietcong to fight while the US were shipping 10,000 tons a day into South Vietnam (300,000/month) in late 1965, increasing at an very fast rate in 1966...
+Desmond Ng Most was US as I said! Only after the ground troops retreated and only air cariers were "helping" witth air strike until early 1973, after this they did gave almost every small "Huey" helicopter to the South, but the oil crisis in late 1973 was the death for the South, at least together with Watergate and no Nixxon who was a strong supporter of South Vietnam, he already visited the French/(South)Vietnamese leaders as vice-president in the mid 1950's! Than oil price increased by 4 times or more! Only 10% of the helicopter operations could be carried out because of fuel shortages, also ammunition could not be bought in large amounts and almost only defensive operations were done after this... they never had a chance after the US retreat and US President Ford cutting the financial support to almost nothing...
@Don't coom or doom will come I agree but ya have to admit so much was getting ripped off in the BLK market it had to stop it was pointless the south was so corrupt it we would still be sending aid there till this day
They became real supply problems in 1972 when it was clear that US is withdrawing (32,000 US soldiers left at the start of the 1972 offensive), since they did not prepare long enough or they did not bring enough supply down, they didnt except such a resistance, at the begining most south soldiers fled in panic, but after heavy US strikes, including massive B-52 bombing the morale grew. Many South Vietnamese Troops in the North (Hue Area) were almost encircled, but the old soviet tanks used ran out of gasoline and it took over a week to bring new gasoline, so the units could escape, that is why in the "final" 1974 offensive even secret pipelines were built in the South... 1972 was not a success because of lack of fuel/ammu and extreme heavy US bombardements, this time even in Hanoi and Haiphong (most important harbour, which was mined in 1972 by the US after the North started its offensive). Hundreds of B-52 bombed the North back into the 18th century...Power Stations, Railrods, the complete Anti-Aircraft-Units..... almost every fuel and ammu deposit, the North had nothing, all SAM's given by the Soviet Union were used, the morale of the North was also hit badly because Hanoi was hit for the first time with B-52 which do extreme damage and alone the sound creates panic under civilians, it could throw 13 tons of bombs in a short period and destroy a quite large area completely, including tunnels since the bombs used were heavy ones...., Hanoi was a save place since 1945 for the North Vietnamese (the SAM is not a cheap weapon in 1972 such a Surface to Air-Missile, it was expensive high-tech than, so I do not think the Soviets were ready to give the North another large amount of SAM, China maybe some, but not enough and the US used methods to avoid being hit by SAM's, decoy flares and smaller aircraft flew first to make the way free for the B-52.. A-6 Intruder played an very important role too, there is a movie about it... I like it, its from 1991 I think and some known actors play there... its a movie about a aircraft carrier crew in 1972/1973... A-6 Intruder did heavy damage to Vietcong. The Question is just, was it worth to back a corrupt south vietnamese goverment?!
KilonBerlin actually the Soviets gave them a lot of SAMS because they are fighting a common enemy, the Americans and helping Vietnam so America gets bogged down in a war in Vietnam helps weaken then US. North Vietnam also had the most sophisticated ground based air defense network in history at that point and most US aircraft were brought down by SAMs. But that was because for the longest time you could not hit the SAM sites or Airfields for BS political reasons and when those restrictions were finally relieved in addition to other targeting restrictions (Couldn't hit Dams or power stations with LBJ), the air war finally yielded results. And was it worth it? Well It was until the Democrats in the Senate defunded the bill that stopped US aid replacing equipment a on 1:1 basis when it was lost. And that shortage of equipment crippled any possible further successful efforts of defense. Even Vietnam admits that.
Charles Turner Possible, but as said here, when the North was ready" for negotiations it was because of the extreme damage to North Vietnam by Operation Linebacker and the low protest of the SU and China, even when a soviet ship was damaged by one of the mines layed in Haiphong, only small protest came because the soviet ship was damaged. I also found this: "By mid-month, nearly all of North Vietnam had been cleared for bombing raids for the first time in over three years. Air Force and Navy commanders and pilots were relieved that Nixon (unlike President Johnson) left the operational planning to local commanders and loosened the targeting restrictions that had hampered Operation Rolling Thunder. Between 1 May and 30 June B-52s, fighter-bombers, and gunships had flown 18,000 sorties against formidable AAA defenses with the loss of 29 aircraft.The U.S. also now began what North Vietnamese historians have described as "using devious political and diplomatic schemes...to cut back the amount of aid being supplied to us by socialist nations."On 20 April Kissinger met secretly with Brezhnev in Moscow. Unwilling to jeopardize increasingly normalized relations with the West and wary of Washington's growing relationship with Beijing, Brezhnev agreed to apply pressure to Hanoi to end the offensive and negotiate seriously." After the 1972 bombings not only most of North Vietnamese Houses seemed to be damaged but practical any Air-Defense was destroyed completely afaik, maybe they did rebuild it, but directly after the strikes the country was on its knees, and even MG-AA-Positions had been hit thanks to the A-6 Intruder and other systems that marked them as the AA-targets... an invasion at this stage could have been made by the US very easy with using their extreme air firepower and the tanks etc. they had... in 1972 there were not soo many local soldiers in the North, since they were on their long walks through the laos/cambodian jungle or they were already active in the South. Ammu for the tanks heavy guns and heavy machine guns, usual ammu and Fuel was mostly brought down... I think only a very small amount of food since most came from Camodia/Laos and South Vietnamese loyal farmers...this support was very important, would it have been stopped in the 60's when the North did not had such a large Number of Trucks, and the ho-chi-minh trail was really a trail and nothing for trucks (more something for Humvees/Jeeps), if the farmers would have sold, given away the food at 1967, it would had been a desaster for the North... since the amount of cargo would rise by many times in this case... even "only" 100.000 fighters from the North in the south and the men/woman walking the trail also would have needed food...they would need MUCH more persons to move additionaly the food, or try with trucks, but only at night and without lights because of US Jets, later I think the modern jets had a early-version of a thermo-camera, yea it is not so easy to bring food over a distance ov more than 1000km to the "front" without the roads, the vehicles and the gasoline, and I know it was pre-1973, oil was cheap but the North was poor in US-$, it was also the overwhelming income source of western currencies for the soviets, oil and gas made like 95% or so..Russia today 90% I think, no change, but before the oil-crisis and after it (after it of course the soviets were in a good position, but than their afghanistan war was so expensive that most of the income of a downed oil price (it was a CIA-OPEC-Plan to weaken the soviets by cutting their main income source oil through a strong dropping oil price, and on the other hand the Americans send more more and more money for weapons together with the Saudis... this led to the collaps of the Soviet Union, and the Reputation of the Red Army was also hit badly, not able to beat a few people living in "mud walled hut"(?translator), however, very primitive village life in Afghanistan in the 80's, the towns with help of the Soviets were a bit better and from the years prior to the war... but all this was destroyed after Russians left. It was like a game...... sad for the men on 4 sides (US, VIetnamese, Soviet, Afghan/Pashtun), and it created lots of group of crazy guys which want to fight the holy war... really crazy guys.
Wild weasels were extremely effective on the Sam sites the north started shooting sams like a shotgun effect. That lowered the hit rate way down they couldn't turn on the radar or the weasels would destroy the site
I double checked it it is definitely a bazooka it's much to small to be a recoiless. They basically the same thing if you look closely their is a sight on it
Too many people fail to realize that broadcast technology was in its infancy. Most of ww 2 was still a b/ w war. Except for a few frames of the Hitler. Chances are the copies of this series was more than likely a vhs format. Regardless the grainy picture gives the viewer a real sense of being there.
While it was a military success for the US it was a political disaster for the war, and who can blame them. The war would have spread to Cambodia and Laos, more troops needed and it would have led to another decade of wars.It would have further destabilised the region. Tet exposed the failings the US had in intel gathering and understanding the VC and NVA battle doctrine.
Can someone tell me what episode that has a clip of Lyndon Baines Johnson getting really angry and starts smashing the table with his fist at a press conference and saying "Make no mistake about it! We are goin go win!" Can someone please tell me!
Is this "marine"attachment that was mentioned in this film Army security guards that were attached to the 716 m p . I was their and find that no place in this film are we mentioned. WTF!
You are the only person I have ever read that asked that question. My guess would be that they never made it and the bodies are lieing somewhere in the jungle to be discovered sometime in the distant future by acheologists. There are another estimated 150,000 refuges from the 1972 easter offensive that fled the highlands for safety with only 45,000 who made it alive.
When General Westmorland said that using Tet to launch attacks was deceitful I had to laugh, the American leadership knew that a major offensive was coming and they strongly believed it was going to be during Tet, they even asked the south Vietnamese government to cancel the Tet holiday and/or cancel all military leave, requests that were turned down, the only thing that really took them by surprise was the size and scope of the offensive, especially in the Saigon area, as the USA, ie Westmorland, believed that the attacks would be in the North around the DMZ/border region, even after the attacks around Saigon etc he still maintained it was diversionary. Little did they know that the Tet offensive virtually destroyed the VC as a fighting force, and had the USA and allies kept up the pressure on the north Vietnamese uncle Ho would have been forced into peace treaties, even surrender, but the American administration eased the pressure giving the north both time and continued confidence to rebuild its forces, thus extending the war AND leading America and allies to abandon the south Vietnamese to their fate in the early 70s, something that most American and allied nations citizens wanted, but the south Vietnamese were just left “high and dry” by, in essence, the USA, not the military, the administration and president Nixon just walked away, what a waste of 58,000 American lives, a high number of allied nations lives, and the Vietnamese death toll in the millions, and for what??????????? NOTHING, just a waste of lives, materials (unless you were an armaments manufacturer) and time, time that millions of MEN,WOMEN AND CHILDREN can never get back, and, in my humble opinion and belief, the allied leadership and governments should be ashamed of themselves and be haunted by the blood on their collective hands. Despite my criticism and controversial opinions this is an excellent, if sometimes gory, documentary, as all in the series are. Massive thumbs up 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍/10 🇬🇧🏴
I remember from the first Iraq war, some Republican Guard driving pick-ups with MG's mounted attacked a US armoured Division and the army spokesman on the news called it "A cowardly attack"- yeah, right.
@@enlightenedwarrior7119 maybe they should have gotten the fu*k out of the country and never come back, US warmongers killed thousands of civilians, but for the US thats buisness as usual.
The main reason the NVA/Vc lost was General Giap expected the people of South Vietnam to rise up against the US. What actually happened was nowhere in the country did the people join the NVA or VC. The VC lost many troops in battle and were decimated, the NVA lost many as well. The reporting by the US media showed every battle as the strength of the enemy, and how poorly the war was going for the US, so the end result was the US learned of it as a loss and popular opinion turned against the war
@qawwss2000: Maybe but they would have for sure prevailed with the amount of soldiers and weapons, which the Americans did deploy there; and this isn’t about cruelty but strategy: If one does depose a minority government and then does hold popular elections it is clear that the majority will prevail and if that majority is religiously in league with one of one’s major detractors he will win the war and thus did Persia, no matter how cruel the US would have been as their strategy was flawed.
I want to finish my School-based assessment on the topic of 'Is tet Offensive a turning point of vietnam war?' Can someone tell me if it is a complete strategic failure for the NVA? Please, help me.
31:02 What word is this?? He was deeply "relacted"? This word does not seem to exist... redacted?? I mean it is clear what it means but I would like to know this word for the future so thanks for any help :)
This might be pretty irrelevent but can anyone help me with this essay question: Explain the reasons for the outcome of the Tet Offensive. Can anyone assist?
In effect even though Giap lost and was sidelined by the leaders of the country for a while the fact that it was percieved as a loss by the people of the US turned it into a psychological Victory for the NVA and affected the outcome of the war.
So you're saying that despite the heavy North Vietnamese loss, the loss of support for the US allowed the NVA to get a boost in morale? thanks, and I want to know how the VC lost, was it just simply due to poor planning and superior firepower of the americans?
Ya, most people dont know that the war continued long after 1975, through a US led economic strangulation, similar to how cuba is treated today (but not china, because they're too strong for that). I've always claimed vietnam finally surrendered in 1994, when they accepted the new economic terms that let them join the world marketplace. I dont know much about what the effect of the imf has been there, but its probably no different than how they've abused other poor countries too.
It was an essay so there wasn't really any right answer. I realised that finding reason's for the outcome of this battle was pretty hard to find, so I just did the battle of Gettysburg and I got 18 out of 20 :D
Look how drained North Vietnam was in 1971. Imagine that war continuing in a "tet-scale" for another decade. It would make the conflict even more interesting.
To say that Americans 'lost' the Vietnam War are inaccurate. Most people don't realize only 1 in every 7 American Soldiers deployed to Vietnam actually saw combat. The other 6 were in any manner of support roles from operations planning to logistics and dealing with huge supply chain issues. This mean the American Army was undermanned when it should not have been. Combine this with a lack of political support and direct political interference - the American efforts were not as successful as they could have been. The NVA and Vietcong could have been defeated. Even with the forces that the Americans had - they still inflicted huge loses on the North. And let's face facts here. Russia all but made this invasion possible. They sent advisers, Pilots, and huge amounts of weapons. Had the American Military been able to conduct Warfare from the front as opposed from Warfare in Washington - they would have kept the North out of South.
lairdriver Without reporters shocked from the battles, especially in saigon, the war would have had great chances to end another way... TeT was a decisive US victory which inflicted such large casualties that the Vietcong alone were only seen as a "support"-troop for at least 2 or even 3 years after TeT, of more than 80,000 men at least over 40,000 were killed/captured/missing, some sources like the former Vietcong General Trần Văn Trà, even said 70,000... I think a bit over 40,000 is realistic. It was a real luck that they used different calenders in North and South and a few attacks were carried out 1 day to early increasing US combat troops defense level and the South began to call his men on TeT-Holidays back to their units.. it was sad that the defenders of the Saigon US Embassy (a Military Police Unit) were not warned because of the higher alarm status, but even without it they really fought brave and did not wait for Army or Marines first, immediately the recapturing began...... without the press and with a few more men like the Generals in Pentagon wanted would have changed the war... TeT was what Westmoreland wanted... large battles, not over 100 cities attacked at once, but large fights (all together) with large casualties for the Vietcong/North compared to own casualties. Keeping up the pressure would force the Vietcong to go back to extreme defense fights to minimize casualties, since most of their officers or expierenced guerillas their power on the battlefield was heavily reduced and only the North could close that gap with sending its own troops under direct command of the North and in most cases afaik also with North Vietnamese Army Uniforms... without the press catastrophy it really would have been a major "defense victory" all over the country....
I haven't heard the Johnson tape saying the war was a 'real loser'. By itself I don't think it means he thought the war wasn't winnable. I do believe the media had much to do with the perception of the American public and focused on any and all errors made while the VC and NVA were given a free pass. However I also believe as did many at the time, that the strategy for winning the war was wrong. There were several times during the war when events showed different tactics were needed.
I think that your above answer is responsible, concise, correct, and a nice change from the usual propaganda that other historians have used to cast a shadow over the Vietnam War. Tet was a classic example of a politcal victory by the communist forces, despite their horrific losses. The US Military should receive way more credit for their heroic stance, not only during Tet, but for the entire war.
@qawwss2000: But if the Americans were really upset about being lied to they would have indicted Bush and all his ministers and senior officials. And you mustn’t mark my comments that way because I love Spam, according to Monty Python.
So much heartache, pain and loss and for what? What is never mentioned is that this war was fought mostly by bloods. When the soldiers returned nobody gate a shit about them.
You created a crater after not allowing their self-determination, though they would have learned bitterly that capitalism is more productive after decades...but with a good deal of their farm-based infrastructure in tact. And they probably would have been so nationalist that they'd have rejected China and the USSR after their victory over France. Technically even if the US won, it wouldn't have been "de-centralized" seeing as how a military dictatorship would have likely taken the reigns.
(I clicked "Not Spam" for your post) For sure, the vietnam and iraq occupations could have been successful, had the mongols or nazis been in charge. The media warned in 2002 that to win in iraq, the US would have to be at least as cruel as saddam. That isn't our nature, when in the world's spotlight. The nature of the viets was always to continue the war, regardless of their losses and whatever went on in the US. (Also, americans were just disgusted at being lied to - they weren't "afraid".)
I'd be curious about what the "right answer" to that essay question was? I hope the schools are just covering the major concepts because a right answer for that will probably never be agreed on by those in the know. Those who blamed the media are the same people today who believe the same brand of overconfident neocon leaders in 2002 claiming that the US occupation of iraq would be welcomed by iraqis as "liberation". What are they blaming now for that mistake? Certainly Not themselves.
Yes, 90,000,000 people in poverty by a Communist Party )... with an unemployment rate of 4.46%, and the "communists" are now one of the most economically open and fastest growing economies in Asia after de-centralized economic reforms...and that privatization of enterprises is on the rise in Vietnam.
What would have happened to Vietnam after the Cold War in this scenario is purely speculative. BTW, I'll most likely earn one-third of what an average American worker earns after graduating...though that's still considerably more than a Vietnamese worker albeit. PS. Before you go on about demonizing the center-right democrats for not being right (or far right) I also recommend looking at a political compass...or horseshoe. Ta ta for now.
Look at all of the people complaining about the quality of this documentary. It's called *Battlefield* Vietnam, meaning that it focuses on the war itself and its battles and campaigns. It is not a documentary made to focus and apologize about the actions of the U.S. military in the Vietnam War, nor is it made to condemn its involvement. It's made for those of us who wish to learn about how the war played out, and _not for those of you who wish to see a video confirming your political views._
I believe the first season does not focus on the Holocaust either, but it focuses on the battles of the Second World War, because you know, it's *Battlefield*.
Thank you
Thank you !!! These bleeding heart leftist drive me insane. They always forget to tell about the VC slaughtering civilians perfect example is in hue where the VC and nva killed thousands of innocent people
@@enlightenedwarrior7119 I think you missed the point. The documentary is not talking about the crimes commited by the US forces either. It is Battlefield. They concentrate on the battles and strategies. btw, there is no war, where civilians were not slughtered.
AMAZING exactly how much information
This show provides. Great Narration also. A+++
😊😊😊
@@MrDoa83 right, civillians have been put to the sword and entire towns sacked and looted by armies,raiders and warlords since the dawn of time.
I used to watch this programme on tv when I got home from work on a Saturday night!
This is one of the best Vietnam learning tools available
IT certainly is.
minus the annoying music
@@tibchy144 y, the music could be removed
The thing that strikes me the most about Tet in Saigon, and I have read a lot, is that despite all the planning, the amazing tenacity and the guts shown by the communists, the south didn't rise up against the Americans. The government held firm because they had support. Imagine 3 brigades of government soldiers surrounded by multiple divisions of VC, it would have been so easy for them to just give up and turn over and yet they fought tooth and nail against the communists with little American support. I don't want to argue politics but there were many South Vietnamese that didn't want to be communists.
Yeah that is definitely true. The poor South never had decent leadership.
Ich denke, dass es eher so war: Auf dem Land war man eher für Charly und in der Stadt eher neutral oder leicht Pro-Südvietnam da die US-Armee auch wirtschaftlich für großen Aufschwung sorgte in den Städten und Ortschaften die sich nahe den US-Basen bildeten, jedoch haben die Vietcong durch Prostitution und Drogentransport (darin war man ja eh Meister im heimlichen Transport) nach Südvietnam leider auch nicht wenig von diesem Geld abgezweigt,
Was die Bauern angeht war es die überwältigende Schuld der US-Planer, da man ja viele Bauern zwangsweise umgesiedelt hat, ohne Kenntnis oder Beachtung ihrer Traditionen (die ganzen toten Vorfahren sind in der Regel im Dorf oder sogar direkt neben der eigenen Behausung begraben, ist eben eine andere Kultur). Die US-Armee hat dann glaub ich sogar noch vor dem Eintreffen der ersten Bodentruppen diese mittelalterlichen "Schutzdörfer" eingerichtet mit irgendwelchen Brücken und Wassergräben die herabgelassen werden mussten um das Dorf zu betreten, sicherlich eine gute Verteidigung,
wenn Charly denn vietnamesische Bauerndörfer angegriffen hätte im großen Stil... die Ernte war dennoch außerhalb dieser "Burgdörfer" und die Bürger waren sehr sehr unzufrieden auch wenn sie dort erstmals moderne Medizin usw. erhielten, praktisch keiner wollte umziehen... die Zwangsumsiedlung war kein "Winning hearts and minds"... eher losing hearts and minds of the farmers und stärkte damit die Rekrutenzahl des Vietcong massiv...
dazu die Tatsache, dass die Armee erst ab 20 zum Wehrdienst einzog, während der Vietcong sich schon die jungen Leute ab 16 (meist freiwillig) geholt hat... 20 in einem Land mit eher junger Bevölkerung und in Kriegszeiten ist doch völlig idiotisch, vorallem wenn dadurch der Feind noch gestärkt wird...
man hätte ja sowas wie ein Soziales Jahr ab 16 einführen können, alles in Wohnortnähe ohne Zwangsumsiedlung...das war den Leuten wichtig! Dann die jungen Leute schon mit 14-15 in Jugendorganisationen oder Schulen wenn möglich einzubinden, jedoch so, dass sie in der Familie immer noch ausreichend bei der Ernte helfen könnten wie seit Jahrhunderten üblich. Der Reis hätte von den USA für einen guten Preis direkt aufgekauft werden sollen, das wäre nur wenig wenn man pro Tonne +33% mehr zahlt oder so...
damit wäre der Norden gezwungen gewesen auch Nahrung zu schmuggeln. So kam der Vietcong+ die NVA-Einheiten die sich den Guerillas angeschlossen haben mit knapp über 2.000 Tonnen (Munition/Waffen) täglich aus um den Kampf in GANZ Südvietnam wie gewohnt zu führen. Mehr war natürlich besser, aber notfalls reichte das eben weil die Truppen durch Reis aus Südivetnam ernährt wurden...
Bei den Amis waren es glaub ich über 200.000 Tonnen? Die damals weltgrößten Frachtschiffe pendelten zwischen den USA und Südivetnam her, ich glaub höchstens Treibstoff kam zu einem gewissen Teil vom persischen Golf.
Wie in dieser Doku gesagt, gab es ca. 80.000 verschiedene Artikel für die US-Truppen in Vietnam und erstmals kamen Computer in einem Krieg in Logistikzentren zum Einsatz. Der Vietcong brauchte vlt. 30-50 verschiedene Schmuggelgüter, paar unterschiedliche Kaliber Munition/Waffen und Ersatzteile für jene sowie etwas Propaganda-Material.
Um das durchzusetzen hätte die Südvietnamesische Armee auch Gebiete mit hoher Dorfdichte "beschützen" sollen, denn mittelfristig hätte es mehr gebracht als Kämpfe. Weniger Vietcongs und mehr Rekruten für die Südvietnamesische Armee nach einer gewissen Anlaufzeit des Programms.
Für den typischen Ami (~1965 rum) schwer zu verstehen der sich irgendwo ein Haus kaufte und dorthin zog und notfalls irgendwann (durch Trennung/Scheidung?) in ein neues Haus zog hunderte oder gar tausende Kilometer entfernt wieso die Bauern nicht umziehen wollten bzw wieso es ihnen sogar heilig war, aber dafür gibt es doch Kulturexperten die sich auf so etwas spezialisieren, auch bei der Army... oder zumindest hätte man diese einige Szenarien bewerten lassen können.
KilonBerlin Dammit speak English!
Adam Smith Well this could be due to the fact that American influence tend to be in urban areas. Rural areas are the opposite.
Adam Smith Actually the communists initially had a lot of support. But they fucked up when they started arresting teachers, priests, people who worked in the government, police officers, etc and started killing them all left, right, and center. When word of what they were doing spread in South Vietnam, all support evaporated during Tet.
My folks went to Hue on their vacation to SOutheast Asia, they've seen the scars of the battle on the walls of the old citadel.
this is a great series..I am studying more about this war right now and this has Really helped me to understand the battlefields..how things worked in the military etc..THANK YOU FOR POSTING THESE!!
This is the best doc on VN I've seen.
Watch "Vietnam in HD" or "The battle of Long Tan"
I first learned about the city of Hue in the 1996 game Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego, I learned about a mausoleum in the old part of the city. I’ve also been to Hue City during the Tet Offensive in Call of Duty Black Ops 2.
Uncle was killed here. Marine David L. Collins. He was guiding the tank in the street. Took several hits before he fell. I never got to meet him. But still is loved and missed by friends and family 😔
Imperialist invader😊
wish they did a korean war battlefield
Sam Steffen i wish there was a season for every war
Sam Steffen try 20th century battlefield Korean War
Wish they did a Battlefield:Food Fight about my high school food fight
If someone wants to do a Battlefield documentary about my relationships with women that would be just great.
Good call!
There a various positive aspects to the Tet Offensive that are unfortunately overlooked or ignored by many who have taken an interest in undestanding the Vietnam War. One example is the efforts of the 716th Military Police Battalion at the US Embassy and their overall defense of Saigon during the opening phases of Tet. The 716th were the only US forces available in the Capital, as most US Combat forces were deployed throughout the countryside hunting down NLF and NVA forces.
The Americans had two choices to win the War. Deploy a much larger actual combat force - field combat. Or use Atomic Bombs. They were very close to using them. But there were worries that it would draw China and Russia into the conflict if they were used. The Americans chose a tactical retreat. Losing 50,000 men is mind blowing.
lairdriver Another very effective option would be: Ground operations into Laos and Cambodia, like the American general staff in the Pentagon asked for 208,000 additional soldiers (50% as combat troops and 50% as a reserve) for such operations. "Charly" had extreme good camouflage-skills and the border areas had a very very low population density, most area was jungle, a few paths without asphalt and maybe some small villages/farmers with their fields... a massive ground offensive would hit charly with such surprise like TeT hit the USA and the Vietcong had extreme large depots in Laos and Cambodia border Area, as seens in (I think) 1971, when South Vietnamese Units were flown in by American Helicopters to capture a City, already within the first 10 miles in Cambodia they found large hidden supplies.
Another thing I do not get: Hill fights, why did they not hold the hills with smaller units and patrouls around to make sure the Hills would not get hit with mortars and artillery..especially in the Central Highlands and in the mountainous North the Hills were very strategic important. The UN-Coalition in the Afghanistan War (2001-2015) also created many such outposts in most regions in Afghanistan. The Soviet Union did this too in their Afghanistan conflict until 1989.
If the hills were hold for a longer time they could be fortified a bit to withstand smaller artillery/mortar shells inside the commando bunkers and in the trenches and they could block important, maybe even the only road to another location, the Question of how strong these Hills should be is a difficult one...not enough soldiers and their would not be enough men for the needed patrouls outside the hill, but with many hills and over 100, or even a lot more on larger hills, would need a very large amount of troops. Of course evacuation plans with helicopters should be worked out if the Vietcong would try to overrun such outposts with over 1,000 troops in many waves and with mortar/artillery support...
I know the SU lost the War in Afghanistan, or lets say they retreated same as US in Vietnam after ~15.000 soviet casualties, but the men were not important for the Soviets, the loss of their "HIND" helicopters and many modern jet fighters was the reason, the war became to expensive and the Soviet Air Force was really exhausted in February 1989 when the last Soviet troops withdraw, also the convois to supply the hills made the mistake to drive in a convoi in an area with only 1 small road and with some slow vehicles in the convois, and all the convois unit can only drive as fast as the slowest unit in it, tanks drove 20km/h or so in moar convois, giving the "Mullahs" enough time to bring weapons and attack the convoi, and than the convoi was trapped without possible retreat, in the first year the HIND-Helicopters securing the convois hit the Mullahs hard in such cases, but with the anti-air rockets everything changed,
Hill outposts in the Vietnam would would have reduced the mobility of the Vietcong and villages in the range of the Hills would not be able to support the Guerillas so easy or at least the American would exactly know in which villages the Vietcong did get food and other stuff and often the Vietcong hide their weapons in the villages in secret places under the houses or so, easier than creating a large hole in the jungle and hide it...
lairdriver When was the US close to nuking Hanoi?? That's the first I've heard of it. How much more of a combat force would have achieved "total" victory?? The US had 600,000 troops in South Vietnam. These soldiers were not their to invade North Vietnam but to protect the south from invasion. The Vietnamese soldier, north or south is regarded as one of the greatest fighters in the history of military conflict. Vietnam went to war with China almost immediately after the Vietnam War ended and even the chinese were like, I'm outta here.
+lairdriver no. militarily they did the right things. the problem was they didn't implement reforms(or at least didn't force the south gredy corrupt leadership), strengthening the south vietnamese population's resolve in the war against the north. also vietnamization also should've been implemented earlier.
+lairdriver the american army won the battles. but the south vietnamese leaders choose to enrich themselves rather than strengthening their position among the people and solidify the ARVN.
when the NVA attacked in 73, there were only about 50 american combat troops in south vietnam
***** pf.. have fun with the snackbarians and your bankrupt EU, moron.
These documentary videos sure do turn what we are normally told about Vietnam War on its head. The Tet I was always taught as a VC success, not a disaster.
its a succes because the americanos think that they are on there last legs.. and could not be on the offensive true all out vietnam..
@@mariop1636 it accidentally became a political success.
Tactically Tet was of course, a failure. The usual lop-sided casualty figures vs. American and ARVN losses showed that not only did the NVA take huge losses the VC took even worse casualties than that. But the war was of such a nature and the North Vietnams such a ruthless enemy, mere numbers of dead never weakened communist resolve to keep fighting. Leaders at the very top like Giap and Le Duan seemed to barely notice their own losses and certainly never changed tactics in fear of greater ones - Tet was proof enough of that.
And yes, I suppose in retrospect the TET offensive was the turning point in the war. From that point on it became an unwinnable war (politicaly and among the public) and the emphasis was on "withdrawal" better know as 'peace with honor'. Which was neither peace for South Vietnam, nor honor for the troops who had fought there.
You've probably already had your presentation, but in case you still care: While the Ted-Offensive was a major (not complete) military failure that left especially the NLF weakened in South Vietnam, it was a political victory for the communists. Many Americans were shocked that after years of promises for a quick victory, the NLF was able to perform a huge offensive. As the Americans lost faith in the campaign, the White House was forced to negociate in a disadvantaged position.
Hope it helped!
Did I hear that right at 28:16? "The American 199th light infantry brigade defending Long Binh was attacked by a mechanized reserve which hit the flank of the Viet Cong attacking Bien Hoa"?
Everytime the French to fail defend themselves or continue ownership. The u.s. is obligated to clean the mess up. Seriously who fights over rice.
No one told America to get involved, the French even told them not to bother but they wouldn't listen and they got themselves in a far bigger mess than the French who where there
@@samuelademeso9041 that is totally not true. HO asked the Us for assistance and the French threatened to go over to the COMMUNIST side. Look it up
Those who were current on the war differed on what the turning point was. That varied from many in the public today who believed it was always winnable and blamed the loss on the media (and never learned a thing, prompting them to believe a war on a word, describing a tactic -terror- can be possible too). At the other end was LBJ and macnamara who both believed it wasn't winnable, even before they deployed troops there. The tape of LBJ saying the war was "a real loser" in 1965 is astounding!
Little known to many people, the communists May '68 Offensive was more a fierce attack than the Tet Offensive that year
The FRENCH at home are saying: Glad we left, C'est la vie, and ADIOS AMIGO.
They left? umm the Vietnamese forced them them out
@@blueocean-me1ns No! The Americans told the French Since you did such a bad job, We're taking over!......(GO, LEAVE, GET OUT TA HERE!)..........And the rest is history.
@@whutdatytopsy9651 WRONG! Guess you missed it where their last battle with the Vietcong and the VC wiped-out hundreds of French soldiers and then the French got out of Vietnam learn your history..
@@blueocean-me1ns , Nope, didn't miss anything! You need to really read between the lines. The vietnamese got their support from China while billions were being poured in (courtesy of the Americans) supplying the French. Of course, nuclear weapon was off the table. Since the French did a LOUSY job, the Americans took over! What part of history didn't you not understand?
@@whutdatytopsy9651 I bet your going to say China backed the North Vietnamese when the US fought them?
50 years ago today.
And an embarrassing defeat for the US and an undeclared "war"!
The US can win the war, if full-scale campaign and expansion is achieved. Yet, it is prevented to avoid the spark of another "World War". The US is in a strange position with superior firepower, but they had many limitations. You can't win a war without the good public relations.
Amen
The Japanese had superior firepower in ww2 and still took over all of vietnam in about a week lol
Risking another ww and still goin in is insanity
@@UFCMania155 where the hell ya heard that ! Two weeks ?
@@enlightenedwarrior7119 it's known fact rofl. That's all it took the Japanese to take over vietnam
the background music was played by the angels in the sky during the battles and recorded
during filming.
I think it kind of has a depressing tone to me. When you watch the rest of the series on WW2, the music is dramatic but upbeat (like "we're paying a heavy price, but we'll get through this."). Bur Battlefield Vietnam's theme conveys a feeling of effort without reward and pointless sacrifice.
The dreadful honest music is actually inspiringly beautiful and fits so perfect it's touching
"Battlefield: Vietnam" is pretty good series on the U.S. war in Vietnam.
The Tet Offensive proved that American soldiers were fighting a lost cause.
@qawwss2000: What else should Vietnam have done? The promise of Emperor Mao to defend the North with the might of China was enough for them to peruse this war to the bitter end and the alternative would have been a disastrous national partition and the same grievous fate which Korea suffers up to this day; not to mention that China can devour two feuding Vietnamese states far easier than an united and strong one.
The U.S. should have put in a much larger fighting force and "quarantined" the South, creating a line across most of the Laos border and force the North to march supplies much further South. Then swing this border northward and create a line stretching across Vietnam and Laos. Make the NVA walk 1000 miles if they want to get supplies to the South. This would've given time to strengthen the South and reduces cases of insurgency.
Thanks Captain Hindsight.
Anyone knows the street where the American GIs got ambushed and a number KIA @24:15 ? I have beeb wondering all throughout the years where it was. Just part of history to be known and remembered. Thanks.
24:31 Squealing tread sounds for a wheeled vehicle. Because why not?
You might be interested in "Casualties of the Vietnam war" on Wikipedia. You will find some very intersting numbers as to who killed who. Please note, the US isn't listed as the numbers never made the finle tally. If you read the complete analysis by Rummel, you may even find the US numbers he gives high.
As usual, a lot of money was made from the horror and suffering of this war....when will we ever learn?
22:22
Anyone know what type of smg that soldier is spraying with through the window? Is it an M3 grease gun?
Possibly a Carl Gustav m45/Smith & Wesson M76.
Correction: In Late 1965 around 21 tons a day from the North was enough for Vietcong to fight while the US were shipping 10,000 tons a day into South Vietnam (300,000/month) in late 1965, increasing at an very fast rate in 1966...
KilonBerlin What the hell was the south doing to those supplies? Throwing them away? How didn't they win?
+Desmond Ng Most was US as I said! Only after the ground troops retreated and only air cariers were "helping" witth air strike until early 1973, after this they did gave almost every small "Huey" helicopter to the South, but the oil crisis in late 1973 was the death for the South, at least together with Watergate and no Nixxon who was a strong supporter of South Vietnam, he already visited the French/(South)Vietnamese leaders as vice-president in the mid 1950's!
Than oil price increased by 4 times or more! Only 10% of the helicopter operations could be carried out because of fuel shortages, also ammunition could not be bought in large amounts and almost only defensive operations were done after this... they never had a chance after the US retreat and US President Ford cutting the financial support to almost nothing...
@@desmondng5375 it was getting sold in the BLK market. People were making a fortune
@Don't coom or doom will come I agree but ya have to admit so much was getting ripped off in the BLK market it had to stop it was pointless the south was so corrupt it we would still be sending aid there till this day
My uncle was at Hue during the tet offensive
The background music is pure torture
They became real supply problems in 1972 when it was clear that US is withdrawing (32,000 US soldiers left at the start of the 1972 offensive), since they did not prepare long enough or they did not bring enough supply down, they didnt except such a resistance, at the begining most south soldiers fled in panic, but after heavy US strikes, including massive B-52 bombing the morale grew. Many South Vietnamese Troops in the North (Hue Area) were almost encircled, but the old soviet tanks used ran out of gasoline and it took over a week to bring new gasoline, so the units could escape, that is why in the "final" 1974 offensive even secret pipelines were built in the South... 1972 was not a success because of lack of fuel/ammu and extreme heavy US bombardements, this time even in Hanoi and Haiphong (most important harbour, which was mined in 1972 by the US after the North started its offensive).
Hundreds of B-52 bombed the North back into the 18th century...Power Stations, Railrods, the complete Anti-Aircraft-Units..... almost every fuel and ammu deposit, the North had nothing, all SAM's given by the Soviet Union were used, the morale of the North was also hit badly because Hanoi was hit for the first time with B-52 which do extreme damage and alone the sound creates panic under civilians, it could throw 13 tons of bombs in a short period and destroy a quite large area completely, including tunnels since the bombs used were heavy ones....,
Hanoi was a save place since 1945 for the North Vietnamese (the SAM is not a cheap weapon in 1972 such a Surface to Air-Missile, it was expensive high-tech than, so I do not think the Soviets were ready to give the North another large amount of SAM, China maybe some, but not enough and the US used methods to avoid being hit by SAM's, decoy flares and smaller aircraft flew first to make the way free for the B-52.. A-6 Intruder played an very important role too, there is a movie about it... I like it, its from 1991 I think and some known actors play there... its a movie about a aircraft carrier crew in 1972/1973... A-6 Intruder did heavy damage to Vietcong. The Question is just, was it worth to back a corrupt south vietnamese goverment?!
KilonBerlin actually the Soviets gave them a lot of SAMS because they are fighting a common enemy, the Americans and helping Vietnam so America gets bogged down in a war in Vietnam helps weaken then US. North Vietnam also had the most sophisticated ground based air defense network in history at that point and most US aircraft were brought down by SAMs. But that was because for the longest time you could not hit the SAM sites or Airfields for BS political reasons and when those restrictions were finally relieved in addition to other targeting restrictions (Couldn't hit Dams or power stations with LBJ), the air war finally yielded results.
And was it worth it? Well It was until the Democrats in the Senate defunded the bill that stopped US aid replacing equipment a on 1:1 basis when it was lost. And that shortage of equipment crippled any possible further successful efforts of defense. Even Vietnam admits that.
Charles Turner Possible, but as said here, when the North was ready" for negotiations it was because of the extreme damage to North Vietnam by Operation Linebacker and the low protest of the SU and China, even when a soviet ship was damaged by one of the mines layed in Haiphong, only small protest came because the soviet ship was damaged. I also found this:
"By mid-month, nearly all of North Vietnam had been cleared for bombing raids for the first time in over three years. Air Force and Navy commanders and pilots were relieved that Nixon (unlike President Johnson) left the operational planning to local commanders and loosened the targeting restrictions that had hampered Operation Rolling Thunder. Between 1 May and 30 June B-52s, fighter-bombers, and gunships had flown 18,000 sorties against formidable AAA defenses with the loss of 29 aircraft.The U.S. also now began what North Vietnamese historians have described as "using devious political and diplomatic schemes...to cut back the amount of aid being supplied to us by socialist nations."On 20 April Kissinger met secretly with Brezhnev in Moscow. Unwilling to jeopardize increasingly normalized relations with the West and wary of Washington's growing relationship with Beijing, Brezhnev agreed to apply pressure to Hanoi to end the offensive and negotiate seriously."
After the 1972 bombings not only most of North Vietnamese Houses seemed to be damaged but practical any Air-Defense was destroyed completely afaik, maybe they did rebuild it, but directly after the strikes the country was on its knees, and even MG-AA-Positions had been hit thanks to the A-6 Intruder and other systems that marked them as the AA-targets... an invasion at this stage could have been made by the US very easy with using their extreme air firepower and the tanks etc. they had... in 1972 there were not soo many local soldiers in the North, since they were on their long walks through the laos/cambodian jungle or they were already active in the South. Ammu for the tanks heavy guns and heavy machine guns, usual ammu and Fuel was mostly brought down... I think only a very small amount of food since most came from Camodia/Laos and South Vietnamese loyal farmers...this support was very important, would it have been stopped in the 60's when the North did not had such a large Number of Trucks, and the ho-chi-minh trail was really a trail and nothing for trucks (more something for Humvees/Jeeps),
if the farmers would have sold, given away the food at 1967, it would had been a desaster for the North... since the amount of cargo would rise by many times in this case... even "only" 100.000 fighters from the North in the south and the men/woman walking the trail also would have needed food...they would need MUCH more persons to move additionaly the food, or try with trucks, but only at night and without lights because of US Jets, later I think the modern jets had a early-version of a thermo-camera, yea it is not so easy to bring food over a distance ov more than 1000km to the "front" without the roads, the vehicles and the gasoline, and I know it was pre-1973, oil was cheap but the North was poor in US-$, it was also the overwhelming income source of western currencies for the soviets, oil and gas made like 95% or so..Russia today 90% I think, no change, but before the oil-crisis and after it (after it of course the soviets were in a good position, but than their afghanistan war was so expensive that most of the income of a downed oil price (it was a CIA-OPEC-Plan to weaken the soviets by cutting their main income source oil through a strong dropping oil price, and on the other hand the Americans send more more and more money for weapons together with the Saudis...
this led to the collaps of the Soviet Union, and the Reputation of the Red Army was also hit badly, not able to beat a few people living in "mud walled hut"(?translator), however, very primitive village life in Afghanistan in the 80's, the towns with help of the Soviets were a bit better and from the years prior to the war... but all this was destroyed after Russians left. It was like a game...... sad for the men on 4 sides (US, VIetnamese, Soviet, Afghan/Pashtun), and it created lots of group of crazy guys which want to fight the holy war... really crazy guys.
One Sam was a million dollars back then
Wild weasels were extremely effective on the Sam sites the north started shooting sams like a shotgun effect. That lowered the hit rate way down they couldn't turn on the radar or the weasels would destroy the site
Is there HD quality videos of this documentary in youtube.
37:05
That little ARVN soldier fired a Recoilless Rifle from his shoulder!!!
+katey1dog I thought he used an old WW2 bazooka when I first saw that weapon.
+Lenin Luna i think its an m18 recoiless rifle.
Do you think the term recoilless is there because it looks pretty?
I think that's a bazooka kind of small to be a recoiless
I double checked it it is definitely a bazooka it's much to small to be a recoiless. They basically the same thing if you look closely their is a sight on it
Had I been a draft dodger, I could be a coward President just like Tramp
Or you could of gotten out of the war like Ted Nugent and crapped your pants in front of the draft board.
Too many people fail to realize that broadcast technology was in its infancy. Most of ww 2 was still a b/ w war. Except for a few frames of the Hitler. Chances are the copies of this series was more than likely a vhs format. Regardless the grainy picture gives the viewer a real sense of being there.
While it was a military success for the US it was a political disaster for the war, and who can blame them. The war would have spread to Cambodia and Laos, more troops needed and it would have led to another decade of wars.It would have further destabilised the region. Tet exposed the failings the US had in intel gathering and understanding the VC and NVA battle doctrine.
I think thats a valid statement, however I would add the importance that the media had in the portrayal of the battle, and the followup.
Can someone tell me what episode that has a clip of Lyndon Baines Johnson getting really angry and starts smashing the table with his fist at a press conference and saying "Make no mistake about it! We are goin go win!" Can someone please tell me!
Might be the khe Sanh battle
"Get sum Get sum Get sum" ---- Helicopter gunner (Full metal jacket)
Is this "marine"attachment that was mentioned in this film Army security guards that were attached to the 716 m p . I was their and find that no place in this film are we mentioned. WTF!
You are the only person I have ever read that asked that question. My guess would be that they never made it and the bodies are lieing somewhere in the jungle to be discovered sometime in the distant future by acheologists. There are another estimated 150,000 refuges from the 1972 easter offensive that fled the highlands for safety with only 45,000 who made it alive.
When General Westmorland said that using Tet to launch attacks was deceitful I had to laugh, the American leadership knew that a major offensive was coming and they strongly believed it was going to be during Tet, they even asked the south Vietnamese government to cancel the Tet holiday and/or cancel all military leave, requests that were turned down, the only thing that really took them by surprise was the size and scope of the offensive, especially in the Saigon area, as the USA, ie Westmorland, believed that the attacks would be in the North around the DMZ/border region, even after the attacks around Saigon etc he still maintained it was diversionary. Little did they know that the Tet offensive virtually destroyed the VC as a fighting force, and had the USA and allies kept up the pressure on the north Vietnamese uncle Ho would have been forced into peace treaties, even surrender, but the American administration eased the pressure giving the north both time and continued confidence to rebuild its forces, thus extending the war AND leading America and allies to abandon the south Vietnamese to their fate in the early 70s, something that most American and allied nations citizens wanted, but the south Vietnamese were just left “high and dry” by, in essence, the USA, not the military, the administration and president Nixon just walked away, what a waste of 58,000 American lives, a high number of allied nations lives, and the Vietnamese death toll in the millions, and for what??????????? NOTHING, just a waste of lives, materials (unless you were an armaments manufacturer) and time, time that millions of MEN,WOMEN AND CHILDREN can never get back, and, in my humble opinion and belief, the allied leadership and governments should be ashamed of themselves and be haunted by the blood on their collective hands.
Despite my criticism and controversial opinions this is an excellent, if sometimes gory, documentary, as all in the series are. Massive thumbs up 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍/10 🇬🇧🏴
I remember from the first Iraq war, some Republican Guard driving pick-ups with MG's mounted attacked a US armoured Division and the army spokesman on the news called it "A cowardly attack"- yeah, right.
If only Tramp would not have been a coward, we would have been safe from the brave President.
Oh Look a VC!!! Oh Damn Call an Airstrike!
What ya want them to do say hey let's go fight them hand to hand
@@enlightenedwarrior7119 maybe they should have gotten the fu*k out of the country and never come back, US warmongers killed thousands of civilians, but for the US thats buisness as usual.
The main reason the NVA/Vc lost was General Giap expected the people of South Vietnam to rise up against the US. What actually happened was nowhere in the country did the people join the NVA or VC. The VC lost many troops in battle and were decimated, the NVA lost many as well. The reporting by the US media showed every battle as the strength of the enemy, and how poorly the war was going for the US, so the end result was the US learned of it as a loss and popular opinion turned against the war
@qawwss2000: Maybe but they would have for sure prevailed with the amount of soldiers and weapons, which the Americans did deploy there; and this isn’t about cruelty but strategy: If one does depose a minority government and then does hold popular elections it is clear that the majority will prevail and if that majority is religiously in league with one of one’s major detractors he will win the war and thus did Persia, no matter how cruel the US would have been as their strategy was flawed.
Thank goodness those nva divisions were in khe Sanh and no hue. It would have really been a mess there
I want to finish my School-based assessment on the topic of 'Is tet Offensive a turning point of vietnam war?' Can someone tell me if it is a complete strategic failure for the NVA? Please, help me.
31:02 What word is this?? He was deeply "relacted"? This word does not seem to exist... redacted?? I mean it is clear what it means but I would like to know this word for the future so thanks for any help :)
KilonBerlin Its reluctant, not relacted.
Desmond Ng Thank you!
KilonBerlin No prob.
Iam aginst protesting the vitnam war iam for the vitnam war 🎉🎉people who protest aginst the vinam war dont understand about wars 🎉🎉
This might be pretty irrelevent but can anyone help me with this essay question:
Explain the reasons for the outcome of the Tet Offensive.
Can anyone assist?
In effect even though Giap lost and was sidelined by the leaders of the country for a while the fact that it was percieved as a loss by the people of the US turned it into a psychological Victory for the NVA and affected the outcome of the war.
So you're saying that despite the heavy North Vietnamese loss, the loss of support for the US allowed the NVA to get a boost in morale? thanks, and I want to know how the VC lost, was it just simply due to poor planning and superior firepower of the americans?
sad for humanity, sad for Mother Earth, and for all families. So sad.
Ya, most people dont know that the war continued long after 1975, through a US led economic strangulation, similar to how cuba is treated today (but not china, because they're too strong for that). I've always claimed vietnam finally surrendered in 1994, when they accepted the new economic terms that let them join the world marketplace. I dont know much about what the effect of the imf has been there, but its probably no different than how they've abused other poor countries too.
It was an essay so there wasn't really any right answer. I realised that finding reason's for the outcome of this battle was pretty hard to find, so I just did the battle of Gettysburg and I got 18 out of 20 :D
Look how drained North Vietnam was in 1971. Imagine that war continuing in a "tet-scale" for another decade. It would make the conflict even more interesting.
dano159 it did, North Vietnam went to war with Cambodia and china after the us.
thanks, much obliged!
54:20
M-551 Sheridans?
The answer is obvious: without the airforce, less humans would have died.
To say that Americans 'lost' the Vietnam War are inaccurate. Most people don't realize only 1 in every 7 American Soldiers deployed to Vietnam actually saw combat. The other 6 were in any manner of support roles from operations planning to logistics and dealing with huge supply chain issues. This mean the American Army was undermanned when it should not have been. Combine this with a lack of political support and direct political interference - the American efforts were not as successful as they could have been. The NVA and Vietcong could have been defeated. Even with the forces that the Americans had - they still inflicted huge loses on the North.
And let's face facts here. Russia all but made this invasion possible. They sent advisers, Pilots, and huge amounts of weapons. Had the American Military been able to conduct Warfare from the front as opposed from Warfare in Washington - they would have kept the North out of South.
lairdriver well north vietnam completed their objectives, US didnt i dont know how this isnt a lost war?
lairdriver Without reporters shocked from the battles, especially in saigon, the war would have had great chances to end another way... TeT was a decisive US victory which inflicted such large casualties that the Vietcong alone were only seen as a "support"-troop for at least 2 or even 3 years after TeT, of more than 80,000 men at least over 40,000 were killed/captured/missing, some sources like the former Vietcong General Trần Văn Trà, even said 70,000... I think a bit over 40,000 is realistic. It was a real luck that they used different calenders in North and South and a few attacks were carried out 1 day to early increasing US combat troops defense level and the South began to call his men on TeT-Holidays back to their units.. it was sad that the defenders of the Saigon US Embassy (a Military Police Unit) were not warned because of the higher alarm status, but even without it they really fought brave and did not wait for Army or Marines first, immediately the recapturing began...... without the press and with a few more men like the Generals in Pentagon wanted would have changed the war... TeT was what Westmoreland wanted... large battles, not over 100 cities attacked at once, but large fights (all together) with large casualties for the Vietcong/North compared to own casualties. Keeping up the pressure would force the Vietcong to go back to extreme defense fights to minimize casualties, since most of their officers or expierenced guerillas their power on the battlefield was heavily reduced and only the North could close that gap with sending its own troops under direct command of the North and in most cases afaik also with North Vietnamese Army Uniforms... without the press catastrophy it really would have been a major "defense victory" all over the country....
+KilonBerlin No it wouldn't. To think otherwise is to completely ignore the social situation or Vietnamese history in general.
So you were there huh? : p
I haven't heard the Johnson tape saying the war was a 'real loser'. By itself I don't think it means he thought the war wasn't winnable. I do believe the media had much to do with the perception of the American public and focused on any and all errors made while the VC and NVA were given a free pass. However I also believe as did many at the time, that the strategy for winning the war was wrong. There were several times during the war when events showed different tactics were needed.
42:49 cue X Files theme…
Giap just died in 2013, at the age of 102.
You're very welcome!
I think that your above answer is responsible, concise, correct, and a nice change from the usual propaganda that other historians have used to cast a shadow over the Vietnam War. Tet was a classic example of a politcal victory by the communist forces, despite their horrific losses. The US Military should receive way more credit for their heroic stance, not only during Tet, but for the entire war.
And when they won the hills...they Choppered off the top and never even used them..wtf
Wish they did a Battlefield:Food Fight about my high school food fight
The nva and nlf were defeated no push in the Noth to end it
@qawwss2000: But if the Americans were really upset about being lied to they would have indicted Bush and all his ministers and senior officials.
And you mustn’t mark my comments that way because I love Spam, according to Monty Python.
Mr.Cong??? Sir Charles.
You go into urban combat and are told you can use artillery or air strikes to not damage buildings 🤪
excelent !!
So sad...So many people from both sides has been killed for Absolutely nothing at all...
TO SHAKE THE EARTH AND SHOCK THE SKY!
thanks, anyway, that might help
So much heartache, pain and loss and for what? What is never mentioned is that this war was fought mostly by bloods. When the soldiers returned nobody gate a shit about them.
You created a crater after not allowing their self-determination, though they would have learned bitterly that capitalism is more productive after decades...but with a good deal of their farm-based infrastructure in tact. And they probably would have been so nationalist that they'd have rejected China and the USSR after their victory over France.
Technically even if the US won, it wouldn't have been "de-centralized" seeing as how a military dictatorship would have likely taken the reigns.
(I clicked "Not Spam" for your post)
For sure, the vietnam and iraq occupations could have been successful, had the mongols or nazis been in charge. The media warned in 2002 that to win in iraq, the US would have to be at least as cruel as saddam. That isn't our nature, when in the world's spotlight. The nature of the viets was always to continue the war, regardless of their losses and whatever went on in the US. (Also, americans were just disgusted at being lied to - they weren't "afraid".)
WOOW .........us marines were rescued by the airforce in all major battles what happens without the airforce
Respect to all sides! political madness.
I'd be curious about what the "right answer" to that essay question was? I hope the schools are just covering the major concepts because a right answer for that will probably never be agreed on by those in the know. Those who blamed the media are the same people today who believe the same brand of overconfident neocon leaders in 2002 claiming that the US occupation of iraq would be welcomed by iraqis as "liberation". What are they blaming now for that mistake? Certainly Not themselves.
We actually were in the beginning but we fired the Iraqi army and they lost their jobs then ya had a insurgency.
I was there....
IF america had invaded North Vietnam after the Tet Offensive they could have won the war. Question is, was it worth it? I think not.
NLF?
Yes, 90,000,000 people in poverty by a Communist Party )... with an unemployment rate of 4.46%, and the "communists" are now one of the most economically open and fastest growing economies in Asia after de-centralized economic reforms...and that privatization of enterprises is on the rise in Vietnam.
Privatization is not COMMUNISM
That is what he said!!
You Americans could be more persistant in that war. Damn it was in desperate positions some of the US troops and they done en excellent job.
What would have happened to Vietnam after the Cold War in this scenario is purely speculative.
BTW, I'll most likely earn one-third of what an average American worker earns after graduating...though that's still considerably more than a Vietnamese worker albeit.
PS. Before you go on about demonizing the center-right democrats for not being right (or far right) I also recommend looking at a political compass...or horseshoe. Ta ta for now.
Try leaveing out the w's and dot com. Or use the Title that appears when googled.
Another war lost by politicians
Okay! thanks :)
Best war - This war should have continued for least another decade.
what about the normal ppl's suffering ?
Fuk that it wasn't worth one American boys life
hahaha Mr.Kong