The wayback machine
Today Real Clear Politics’ Morning Edition very slyly ran an Airpower article from 1972 titled The Press and the TET Offensive: a flawed institution under stress.
The Tet offensive of 1968 must surely be regarded as one of history’s chameleon campaigns. When the North Vietnamese and Vietcong troops assaulted targets throughout the Republic of Vietnam at the end of January 1968, they expected to trigger an uprising of the South Vietnamese people against their government. Despite some spectacular early successes, the attacks failed. The South Vietnamese did not embrace the cause; thousands of sappers, assault troops, and cadres met their deaths before overwhelming allied counterattacks; and the insurgent infrastructure was so decimated at the end of the fighting that no large enemy offensives could be mounted for four years.
Nonetheless, the Tet offensive was a turning point in the war, and the North Vietnamese were successful in altering the course of the war far beyond the accomplishments of their army. The American people were shocked that the Vietcong/ North Vietnamese Army (VC/NV A) possessed the strength to make the widespread strikes. In the public clamor that followed, President Lyndon Johnson announced a bombing halt and withdrew from the 1968 Presidential race. The policy of Vietnamization was launched, and many Americans concluded that the war was too costly to pursue.
It has always been clear that the press played a vital role in this dramatic shift of opinion. It has been evident that dissatisfaction with the war among media opinion-makers helped form an American public attitude of discouragement.
Written at the very tail end of our war in Vietnam the article details the ignorant and sometimes ideologically duplicitous role the media played in spinning the Tet Offensive. Of course a substantial amount of contemporary scholarship has covered this subject in great depth but to see that, even then, those in the know were well aware of the media’s role in shaping the vital public perception of our wars is quite the juxtaposition of the understanding of the war as portrayed by popular culture. There isn’t much new here but, as we fight out own wars at home against corrupted media institutions, perhaps it will serve as reinforcement of the very real, very tangible, stakes 40 years later.
Category: Air Force, Historical, Media
I have stated for a long time that we did not lose Vietnam. That, despite Johnson’s horrendous mismanagement, the troops on the ground were able to wrest victory from defeat again and again. But the press made every blunder into a disaster and every victory pointless.
And these same jaggabushes are leading the charge to “rethink” our current roles in Afghanistan.
Been there, done that!
Doc, amen and amen! My older brothers and cousins didn’t lose the Viet Nam war. It was the politicians and the press of the day that would not allow them to win. Redonculous ROEs, inconsistent missions, ridiculous battle plans…my family never had a chance! If the pols had wanted us to win, they would have lined up every bomber available, wing tip to wing tip, and bombed everything up to Chinese border. THEN they would have lined up every available Army and Marine Division and send then north to finish the job.
Frankly the press, especially Kronkite, have alot to do with the perception of what was happening and why. There is most likely no better example of Tet and it’s aftermath, especially after Gen Abrams took over the War. The war was basically won by the end of 70′. The VietCong were almost entirely destroyed and the NVA defeated, it was Congress that cut off funding in 75′ that finally finished off the south. If people knew what a pinko Walter was back then…
William Westmoreland though, had alot to do with how poorly the war was fought for the first 4 years, he deserves more blame then anyone else(including the press). We forget that at our future peril. Even Maxwell Taylor started to have misgivings when he became ambassador and so did Yarborough before then. Pick up “A Better War” or “Westmoreland” both by Lewis Sorely and must haves. Thank God people like Petreaus did learn from our errors and didn’t dismiss that the US Army leadership had nothing to do with how the war was conducted in the early years.
Well, folks. It’s time for all of us of an age to step up and do the heavy lifting.
Many of us declared some years ago that we would do whatever was necessary to see that THIS generation of warriors does NOT suffer what our generation of warriors endured. It wasn’t right then but in those days the socially correct response was to ignore the idiots and hope they would go away.
They didn’t. If we who have been-there-done-that in all it’s theme variations does not step up to protect these warriors as they take time to heal, who will do it?
There are things that all of us can do. Many are already doing it. May I challenge everyone to find a way – anything from writing letters to the editor to organizing “Welcome Home” events – to honor our warrior class? If we all just do a little something, or just a little more, our combined energy WILL get the job done.
Soldiers don’t win wars, Nations do. Soldiers don’t lose wars. Nations do.
The USA lost the war in Viet Nam. The victory of our enemies way-back then fuels our modern-day domestic enemies.
Real American love a winner – just depends on the model of winning chosen.
[…] Odd Confluence of Events January 31st, 2012 NSOM sorta set the stage. without a direct reference to the […]