Avatar feed
Responses: 3
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
4
4
0
It also was very apparent to many including those of us in Vietnam with LBJ as President between Him and Robert MacNamara, making money was a bigger concern than the reason for being there. The micro management from the White House and DOD with MacNamara were very apparent and got a thousands of people killed. It's My opinion We could have been in and out in 4 to 6 months if it wasn't for those two dirty politicians. Every time they called a bombing halt We got pounded by the enemy, but whatever was destroyed Johnson's Texas buddies from RMK-BRJ Construction company could rebuild, A company, Pacific Architects and Engineers from Texas that was LBJs, but now Lady Birds, (He changed the listed owner from Him to Her) subcontracted wit RMK-BRJ, a consortium of 6 construction companies from Texas that even as Texas Governor Johnson took care of and made money with. Considering RMK-BRJ was doing construction work that Navy Seabees, Army Corp of Engineers and Air Force Redhorse was capable of doing and was already in Vietnam doing exactly that sort of work were the civilian contractors needed ? Well there was no big money to be made if the Military Construction people did the work as they already proved they were quite capable of. Making money of selling construction materials isn't the same as moving in to do work the Military could do itself. RMK-BRJ showed up all sorts of places despite the fact the Military Construction was already there. How do i know that ? I saw them all there Myself during 1968 and 1969 while I was there in Vietnam. There was money to be made, do You actually think they cared about the young men and women that were being killed there. when a lot of money was to be made ? The Military Construction people as well as all the other military people there did do there jobs but the many restrictions and micro managing the Johnson Administration placed on them cost a lot of lives and prolonged the War.
(4)
Comment
(0)
PO3 Edward Riddle
PO3 Edward Riddle
>1 y
I often said , Brother Lawrence, that we could have won that damn War if We the fighters could have fought the way We wanted to, to Win. Just start at the southernmost part and sweep up, killing everybody trying to kill us.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Roland McDonald
MAJ Roland McDonald
>1 y
My dad served also in 1968-69. Later before he passed away he spoke similarly to what he saw in Vietnam about the waste by politicians to dump more money so they and their friends made millions. Frosted my dad's backside alot. So many young soliders fighting with one hand behind their backs with also one leg tied up to hamstring the military's ability to win.
(2)
Reply
(0)
PO3 Edward Riddle
PO3 Edward Riddle
>1 y
MAJ Roland McDonald - Exactly Brother Roland. 5/68-4/69 for me. Moving up the river with some V.C. running along the riverbank shooting his AK at us and it's a no-fire zone? Go figure.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Roland McDonald
2
2
0
Repeating similar thoughts that Eisenhower said about the MIC. Thanks for the share MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
(2)
Comment
(0)
PO3 Edward Riddle
PO3 Edward Riddle
>1 y
Ike gave us a stern warning about the MIC Brother Roland.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Bob Leonard
0
0
0
“If we had been allowed to fight the way we were trained and equipped to, we could have won the war in 6 months.”

That’s the usual sentiment thrown out without much thought given, it seems, to what “winning the war” would look like. I think that Pres. Eisenhower had given more than a few moments of thought to that question, and came to a very different conclusion.

“President Eisenhower told the (security) council "with great force" that he "could not imagine the United States putting ground forces anywhere in Southeast Asia”, and that a war in Vietnam "would absorb our troops by divisions."

........”The president agreed. "You can't go in and win unless the people want you," he told (Sec’y of State) Dulles. "The French could win in six months if the people were with them.”
(pg 224 of 413)

“Led by General Ridgway, the Army continued to protest most strongly against intervention. On 6 April, (1954) the Army chief warned… American commitment would also greatly increase the risk of general war and would play into the hands of the Chinese and Russians, who could stand aside while vital American military resources were dissipated in inconclusive fighting.”
(pg 229 of 413)

https://history.army.mil/html/books/091/91-1/index.html


Restrictive ROEs, no fire zones, et al. were all sources of frustration, but focusing on them ignores the larger issue: the majority of the Vietnamese people didn’t want us there.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close