America wins the Vietnam war

[Faralis]

Peter Tsouras's compilation book "cold war hot" (can be had for a few bucks on amazon) details two "victory" in Vietnam scenario's

one involves the US running highly effective infrastructure building projects in SV along with sending loads of civi's and peace corp types. They pour money into the country to make them economically viable, and the military presence is only advisery or for defensive purposes (almost all military aid is sent build up the SV army) it ends up taking more than a decade

the other one has the us launch a massive invasion of NV in 1970 including sending a full mechanized corps across the dmz and landing marines at haipong... neutral ports funneling gear and supplies to the nva are blockaded and the US catches the NVA flatfooted and slashes their jugular in a matter of days

Anyway, and totally off topic the best scenario is the "cheap Greek wine" and stolichnaya! wins WWIII!!!1

That second one doesn't seem very plausible, to say the least. The DRV was a totally mobilized country and all effort was directed to the war. Therefore, the PAVN was well-stocked and well-supplied. More importantly, they were well trained and had more firepower and assets in the North than they ever did in the South, in addition to probably more manpower.

So yeah, option 1 is a lot better.

Yes but almost the entire NVA was south, so it could do nothing about it. Its not an impossible scenario tactically or strategically, but politically.

No way would the US gov could do something like that without fearing an escalation ...

Yes option 1 ( OTL they try to do it, like the Brits in Malaysia ) has more chances of working ... if they would have done it right instead using their asses to do the thinking.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

Yes but almost the entire NVA was south, so it could do nothing about it. Its not an impossible scenario tactically or strategically, but politically.

Not quite, I couldn't find numbers for 1970, but for the previous years they paint a different picture. In 1966, as the USA was increasing their involvement and the NVA was doing likewise (sending more to the South) they had a total of over 500,000 people in the entire PAVN, with about 56,000 in the South. In 1968, around the time of the Tet Offensive, the number in the South had increased to 200,000, but considering how much more they had been mobilizing the total number would likely be larger than it was in 1966. Also, in 1970 they had loosened the draft restrictions quite a bit. So even if the number total did not change dramatically, that still leaves over 300,000 guys in the North. So in all likelihood the US/ARVN forces are still outnumbered in any northern battles, and for once the NVA gets artillery, air, and armor support. And their fighters were quite skilled, and more importantly perhaps the ARVN tankers dreaded the NVA ones, they thought their tanks were better.

In any case, the whole operation sounds like it'd be Lam Son 719 on a much greater scale. At Lam Son, the ARVN/US were going on a morale high after a victory in the Cambodian Campaign, so they thought to interdict the Ho Chi Minh trail in Laos in one large campaign, and draw the NVA out in the open and destroy them (which is what the hypothetical invasion plan called for). However, due to overconfidence in both the plan and aerial superiority, the plan failed entirely. Vietnamization was revealed to be a total failure (despite Nixon claiming its success afterward, nobody was fooled when they saw the reports of ARVN soldiers desperately clinging to Huey skids to run away as fast as possible) and there were record helicopter losses that shocked the US military. Given the amount of helicopters and other aircraft this plan relies on, and the fact they are going over the SAM/AA infested DRV (seriously, they had a lot of good AA networks) aircraft losses are going to be immense, to say the least. And considering Lam Son was in 1971, they won't have that lesson to have learned from.

 

[aktarian]

And therefore, from an American perspective wouldn't the war remain rather controversial? That is would people continue to question whether saving South Vietnam had been worth the effort and the loss of life, considering it is as you mention, an authoritarian state?

Depends on how long the war lasts and how much it costs (both in money and casualties). Do it quickly and without too much casualties and while people still support the war and you could get away with it

 

[AbeLincoln1865]

In the invasion of North Vietnam in 1970 scenario are you sure the US succedes?

 

[BlairWitch749]

In the invasion of North Vietnam in 1970 scenario are you sure the US succedes?

Yea, they capture Hanoi, Giap and kill off most of the NV leadership in airborne raids...they also capture all the soviet and east german advisers too.

It happens right after the son tay raid

 

[AbeLincoln1865]

then I assume as a result Nixon is thought of better by history

 

[BlairWitch749]

then I assume as a result Nixon is thought of better by history

The story doesn't go that far, its told from Son Tay to a treaty of Paris that permanently recognizes SV independence

 

[AbeLincoln1865]

what happens to North Vietnam?

 

[Faralis]

what happens to North Vietnam?

It gets occupied by UN peacekeepers, I suppose they do not unite both in order to not piss off China too much.

I had to look at the book, too much time since I read it ...

EDIT: ITTL Nixon stills go to China in 72, thats when the story ends.

The author thinks that there wasn´t any political will to invade North Vietnam ( Korea was too fresh in many people´s mind ) and IMHO he´s right, and says that they have two windows of opportunity with most of the NVA seriously touched and/or in SV, after the Tet, and after the Son Tay raid

 

[Glass Onion]

Depends on how long the war lasts and how much it costs (both in money and casualties). Do it quickly and without too much casualties and while people still support the war and you could get away with it

I'm specifying a scenario where the war is essentially won at the last possible minute. Meaning the United States somehow intervenes to prevent the North Vietnamese invasion in 1975, saving South Vietnam at around the time when it fell IOTL. The Vietnam War up to that point remains essentially the same.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

I'm specifying a scenario where the war is essentially won at the last possible minute. Meaning the United States somehow intervenes to prevent the North Vietnamese invasion in 1975, saving South Vietnam at around the time when it fell IOTL. The Vietnam War up to that point remains essentially the same.

Okay, because then it is really unlikely. By 1975 the NVA had learned a lot from their mistakes, and morale in the South was not so good. To be more specific, the North had recovered from previous losses, modernized everything they had, had built up the roads and planned better routes for the armor, infiltrated even more SAM systems into the South, and spent years planning for the operation that was to take place in 1975. In contrast, the ARVN was still suffering from the withdrawal of the US. The officer corps was still ludicrously corrupt, a great many soldiers were AWOL at any given time, ammo allocations for artillery batteries dropped 100 rounds daily to 4, and the aforementioned SAMs made any kind of flying a problem.

And to top it off, if the war goes the same up until 1975, the US ain't helping. Even assuming significant forces get there (I doubt they could send anything more meaningful than a carrier or two) they won't help against the massive, well-planned total invasion. Bottom line, in 1975 the South was screwed. Well, to be fair they never really had a good chance. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam was without a doubt the single most competent and advanced (comparatively, given the time period) country we've ever fought since WW2. Winning isn't easy, and it probably isn't worth it in the long run.

 

[Typo]

Yea, they capture Hanoi, Giap and kill off most of the NV leadership in airborne raids...they also capture all the soviet and east german advisers too.

It happens right after the son tay raid

Yeah now they just need to deal with another Vietnamese insurgency with the Chinese supplying them right across the border

 

[Timmy811]

Meh, I don't have high hopes for a surviving RVN. South Korea was more of an industrial country than they were (and even they still had authoritarian regimes even after the 50's, mind you) and it was certainly more stable, despite the purges during the war.

The industrial part of Korea was the North, the South was principally agricultural.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

The industrial part of Korea was the North, the South was principally agricultural.

Hm, didn't know that, probably me just conflating the postwar with the pre-war years. Sorry. In any case, the point about the South Korea being more stable than South Vietnam stands.

 

[La Rouge Beret]

I'm specifying a scenario where the war is essentially won at the last possible minute. Meaning the United States somehow intervenes to prevent the North Vietnamese invasion in 1975, saving South Vietnam at around the time when it fell IOTL. The Vietnam War up to that point remains essentially the same.

The problem with this POD that at this stage is the economic structure of the country was unravelling with double digit inflation and unemployment. In MAJGEN Lam Quong Thi's biography he talks about the economic weakness of the state by 1974 and how it contributed to the collapse in 1975. So even if the US intervenes to save the country from being overrun by the NVA, their economic malaise will probably preclude a recovery. Consequently if you want a state that can not only defend itself, but has the ability to flourish then an earlier POD is needed for economc stability.

Another point to consider is that because South Vietnam has no strategic depth, their security is intrinsically bound with that of Cambodia and Laos. So their relationships with both countries need to be improved and their interoperability when it comes to military operations. Which will be a hard task considering their cultural grievances on all side.

 

[MacCaulay]

can someone tell me a thread that involves this topic

The Invasion of North Vietnam, 1970. Instead of the conventional invasion of Laos and Cambodia, Nixon invades North Vietnam. The general opinion was about as unanimous as this thread's was, but the discussion was a bit more refined and the folks who stuck around to the second and third pages were more interested in the mechanics of a possible invasion in that timeframe than just shooting the idea down.

 

[Timmy811]

The best POD is not related to Vietnam directly, just have the border clashes of '69 turn into a major Sino-Soviet War.

Nixon would have free reign to do what ever he wanted in Vietnam. Invade the North, carpet bomb Hanoi to ash, whatever. The USSR and China are gonna be to preoccupied to do anything but protest.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

does anyone know any threads that involve this topic?

IMO the best way to have "America win the Vietnam War" is that they provide moderate support to Ho in the 1940s, leaving a united, socialist (but possibly not communist), pro-American Vietnam. Possibly officially unaligned, but, like Yugoslavia, definitely not in the Soviet or Chinese sphere(s).

 

[Metro]

^^Probably the best idea. Otherwise, the North would have had to be completely flattened. But with China next door the US might control mayor cities in the North but not the rural areas.

 

[Readman]

I never understood that, the US helped Uncle Ho in the 40's against the Japanese, the 50's against the French (probably) and they were all buddy buddy, then all of a sudden he's the 'big bad evil communist rawr"....'the hell happened, anyway?