Facts about Vietnam War remain distorted

In reading Chris Green’s article, “Effects of Vietnam War still felt today” in the April 8, ‘My Turn’ section, rekindled many personal memories of that time. Some good, some not so good. Retiring from the U.S. Army after 20 years in 1983, I served four combat tours in Vietnam, starting out as an infantry private in the bloody Ia Drang Valley battles of 1965. In three subsequent tours I served in various leadership positions in the infantry as well as in Special Forces operations. In the course of those tours I was wounded three times. So I guess one could say I was there from the beginning of U.S. troop involvement in Vietnam.

The Vietnam War was a defining event for most Americans over 50 years of age. There is no question about this for the more than two million soldiers who served there. But it is true, as well, for their parents, siblings, and friends, and for supporters and protesters, silent and vocal. Successive U.S. governments during the war years were unable to describe war aims that would gain the support of an active minority of protesting Americans. Historical studies have made clear that our government mismanaged the intervention and misled the American people. Weariness with a costly war that could not seem to be won led to increasing disaffection.

To their great shame, many people who opposed the war took out their frustration by abusing the warriors. Many veterans who returned from Vietnam from 1966 can later tell of abuse to his person and uniform by strangers. Common, also, was the lack of public recognition and thanks for brave and loyal service.

Hollywood and the mass media in general have not been helpful. Apparently, they felt that the theme of duty, honor and service to country is less appealing than sympathy for protesters. Our country needs to understand that the heroes were those who served not those who fled to Canada or burned their draft cards.

Since the end of the war common belief among many Americans is that nothing was achieved by sending our troops to fight in Vietnam. This is inaccurate. Actually, because of the war communist aggression was halted throughout most of Southeast Asia. I’ll explain with a brief history of the war.

After World War II, the French returned to Indochina (Vietnam) to continue their colonialization. Ho Chi Minh, a prominent leader at the time appealed to the U.S. government for support in ousting the French. Initially, Ho Chi Minh was neither a communist nor a capitalist — he was a nationalist. As the French was a U.S. ally, both the Truman and Eisenhower administrations rejected his request. Ho Chi Minh turned to the communist Chinese and the Soviet Union for help, which was given.

The communists developed a long range strategy to dominate all of Southeast Asia beginning with Vietnam as a step off point. The critical question, however, was how would the U.S. respond? A communist-led insurgency in Vietnam against the French had succeeded by 1954 in ejecting the French colonial government. The Geneva Accords of 1954 divided Vietnam into a northern half governed by the communists under Ho Chi Minh, and South Vietnam, initially governed by Emperor Bao Dai. Successive decisions between South Vietnam and the Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson administrations led to the United States assuming the role as protector of South Vietnam against internal insurgents (the Viet Cong) and the communist government of North Vietnam, which directed and supported the Viet Cong.

The confrontation in South Vietnam slowly escalated during the 1950s without decisive result. The United States was determined to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam. By the end of 1962, about 15,000 American military were advising and training South Vietnamese forces and providing them with support. The North Vietnamese increased their support of the Viet Cong, and in late 1964 decided to begin sending regular North Vietnamese forces south along infiltration trails in Laos and Cambodia to enter South Vietnam and force a victory before increasing American commitment could prevent it. The South Vietnamese government requested combat troops from the U.S., and in 1965 President Johnson decided to commit ground troops to prevent a takeover by the North. And so it began.

At the time I was a 19-year-old infantryman in the 1st Air Cavalry Division, which was the first full division assigned to Vietnam. We had arrived just in time. Our first mission was to intercept and defeat a North Vietnamese division that was entering the mid-section of South Vietnam with the mission of cutting the South in half. The movie, ‘We Were Soldiers’ was based within the framework of this campaign.

In the ensuing years of the U.S. ground war (1965-1972) American troops never lost a major battle. However, we still hear pundits as well as U.S. citizens say and believe, even today, that it was “an unwinnable war.” Absolute hogwash. The war was totally winnable. As an example, the communists launched the 1968 Tet Offensive, which resulted in the complete destruction of the Viet Cong as an effective military force, at which time the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) took charge of prosecuting the entire war from Hanoi. Unfortunately, our own media viewed it quite differently. Immediately after the Tet Offensive Walter Cronkite reported to the American people that “the war was lost” describing the heavy fighting as a U.S. defeat, but in reality it was a U.S. victory.

This is but one example of how the media falsified what was actually happening in Vietnam. Their stock in trade was lies and misinformation. In the 1980s General Giap, commander of communist forces in the South, was interviewed on his thoughts of the war’s outcome. He said that following the Tet Offensive their casualties were so high that serious consideration was given by his government to come to the bargaining table to discuss a possible halt in hostilities, but decided against it because of the massive demonstrations in the U.S., and that the Americans, unbelievably, viewed Tet as a loss. “The American media was on our side,” he remarked. Giap went on to say “you had us against the ropes, but instead, you pulled defeat from the jaws of victory.”

The Paris peace talks of 1973 was another U.S. win, with the North Vietnamese agreeing to most of the United States’ demands. Unfortunately, the following year a scandal known as Watergate erupted, eventually causing President Nixon’s resignation. By the spring of 1975, Gerald Ford was a lame duck president and the liberal Democrats were in charge of Washington, and, I believe, had always been invested in our defeat in Vietnam, in collusion with the liberal media of course. Understanding this, the North Vietnamese launched a massive invasion into the South, knowing the U.S. would not come to South Vietnam’s aid. The United States had abandoned South Vietnam.

Americans need to know and understand the real why, what and how it all happened. But the American warriors of this war were betrayed, yes, betrayed. Not only by fellow Americans and the media, but by the political leaders who sent them into harm’s way in the first place. It lives on in movies where Hollywood’s perverse depiction of U.S. combat troops in Vietnam are portrayed as blood thirsty burnouts and losers — outcasts society would prefer to shut away and ignore, like an embarrassing family member. It lives on when veterans sleep under cardboard boxes while a draft dodger slept in the White House. It lives on with lies, cover up and neglect. It will probably continue to live on until we, the last vestiges of that bloody war, are dead, buried and forgotten. Because we serve as a reminder of our nation’s failure to finish the job it started, and it’s debt to the forgotten warriors. And people as a whole prefer not to be reminded of their debts and transgressions. No one likes a call from a bill collector.

On a personal note, I obtained one good thing from the war. I gained brothers who I served with in combat, and to this day we remain close. In the end, after the politicians, pundits, and the blathering media have had their say, the perfect truism that motivates warriors to do the difficult and often horrendous tasks we ask of them in combat is loyalty to the platoon, squad or section. Country, flag, church and family can be important influences on character development. But when bullets and shrapnel are flying their influence is far away. In combat, individual actions are driven by the necessity for cohesion of the team: the safety of a buddy, holding a position, and earning a reputation in the squad when the going is rough is what forms a bond between men that turns them into brothers.

My brothers and I are getting on in years, and our time is passing quickly, but the memory of the war, what we did, and our brothers who died, will stay with us to the end of our days.

• • •

Robert O. Martin, 1SG U.S. Army (Ret.), is a Coeur d’Alene resident who served four combat tours in Vietnam.