|
Edited on Sat Jun-25-05 12:16 AM by teryang
The reason the Viet Nam war was not an "all out" conflict was because international relationships with China and Russia (and consequently the rest of the known world) did not permit it.
Limited to conventional means of attack in restricted areas, limited by Russia and Chinese strategic interests, the war confronted us with an experienced, well armed and led enemy, supported from abroad, committed to their cause, with a more favorable relationship to the social and political realities of the day both domestically and internationally. Victory was impossible regardless of the level of forces brought to bear, unless one was prepared to expand the conflict to the sea lanes and involve Russian armed forces directly.
By the way, the overarching principle of foreign policy of the day was that one does not risk direct engagement with Russian armed forces. The prudence of this principle was never questioned.
Similarly, today there is the same principle with regard to China in its immediate environs, particularly Taiwan and Korea.
The notion that outcomes of wars could have been different, only if we had done more, fall into the category of wishful and unrealistic thinking.
|