AHC: Drag the Vietnam War into the 1980s

[Gillan1220]

What it says in the tin. Just as long as the conflict in Afghanistan is today.

What POD is needed and what will the butterflies be of the 80s, 90s, 2000s, and 2010s?

 

[overoceans]

I guess Ford manages to get more support from congress for South Vietnam, but this doesn't lead to the instant victory that Saigon apologists always seem to assume, and the war limps on until the early 80s.

Political fallout would depend on how badly the South was doing at any given time. Assuming the extra aid gives a boost to Ford's popularity, but ultimately just delays the inevitable, look for 1976 to be a Republican victory, but for the Democrats to win in 1980 and probably 1984.

 

[dianaswordofsappho]

Ford Wins

Does this mean that the draft never ends?

 

[overoceans]

Ford Wins

Does this mean that the draft never ends?

Under the usual optimistic scenarios put forth by those arguing that continued US involvement would have worked, are actual American troops a sine qua non? Or is it just sending Saigon more money, supplies, equipment etc?

 

[Gillan1220]

Under the usual optimistic scenarios put forth by those arguing that continued US involvement would have worked, are actual American troops a sine qua non? Or is it just sending Saigon more money, supplies, equipment etc?

I mean just like Afghanistan today. So more troops, supplies, FOBs, etc.

With the change of technology, I wonder if we could see the M16A2, the M1 Abrams, the F-16, the F-15, the Blackhawk, and the Apache see action in Vietnam.

Ford Wins

Does this mean that the draft never ends?

The draft would probably end at some point.

I wonder what the butterflies will be such as a delayed fall of the USSR, different presidents at the White House, a different 90s, and a different 21st century. 9/11 may be butterflied away here. This timeline would be unrecognizable by present day.

 

[overoceans]

I mean just like Afghanistan today. So more troops, supplies, FOBs, etc.

Thanks for the clarification.

I think more troops might be the deal-breaker for your scenario, politically speaking. I really don't see US public opinion going along with that. At all.

 

[marathag]

Ford Wins

Does this mean that the draft never ends?

Draft was done before Ford took over from Tricky Dick

 

[GuildedAgeNostalgia]

No Watergate. Nixon stays in charge until 1976. Vietnamesization along with continued air support continues. All US troops except advisors and special forces get pulled out and the draft ends. South Vietnam struggles, but still manages to limp on with the communists controlling small/medium amounts of their territory.

The main question is what happens in Cambodia and does China still find a pretext to invade North Vietnam in 1979 without the Khmer Rouge and Cambodian genocide occuring.

South Vietnam will survive with US support into 1991. It's not that difficult to keep it alive. The other main question is what happens to the conflict when the Cold War ends?

 

[Rufus]

If Afghanistan is supposed to be the historical analogy, then this would mean the US has to actually ‚win‘ in Vietnam (including conquering the north), only to be plagued by guerillas for the next two decades, until they finally throw in the towel in the 80s. Maybe if Goldwater somehow wins in 64, he decides to go all out and invades the north. The US would probably be able to conquer North Vietnam relatively quickly if they really wanted to (unless China intervenes), but holding and pacifying it is another matter.

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

Another option is no American draft, or even there is a draft but draftees are not sent to Vietnam, only lifers.

 

[Pete55]

If Nixon is less stupid in handling Watergate, AND if he decides to actually deploy the National guard divisions, then a failed peace negotiation might see a major redeployment. In order for the war to last till the 80s, the Americans need to feel that they have won and simply need to outlast some rebels.

Have the Guard units trainseparately, providing a different army to the one worn down in Vietnam, and then launch a general offensive into North Vietnam from the South, and a double sided amphibious invasion of Hanoi. Make it clear that you aren't interested in co querying the whole country, but force the main MVA units onto major combat. Following this, have the Americans essentially take over the South Vietnamese government MacArthur and Japan style . Have "old army" task groups launch assaultsnon known NVA/VC positions in SV, while having the Guard or "fresh army" units secure south Vietnam in sections. First secure the Capital areas, then secure the Mekong Delta, the islands, the areas south of the Mekong Delta. Have mobile battalions specifically designed to attack into surrounding countries to cut off NVA supply lines.

Give it a couple years, and expect heavy combat at first, but with Hanoi taken the American populace finally feel that they've won. After this you can transition to more local forces.

The reason that this pushes the war on so long is that there are still two hostile foreign powers (USSR, PRC) combining with the remnants of the NVA to wage war, creating a place for the insurgency to be promoted and capital to fund it.

 

[Monk78]

S

What it says in the tin. Just as long as the conflict in Afghanistan is today.

What POD is needed and what will the butterflies be of the 80s, 90s, 2000s, and 2010s?

sino American entente does not take place
Laos and Cambodia is invaded by Chinese to support Vietnam

 

[Riain]

It might be possible with an early war PoD that changes the course of the war away from a quagmire. Perhaps a tip of the spear offensive in like 1966 to clear out VC/NVA sanctuary areas, the HCM-T and other targets in the north would give the advisors and SthV time to get their shit together, and that's what the US does periodically: advisors on the ground and the occasional local offensive when the opposition gets to tough to handle within SthV.

 

[Gillan1220]

No Watergate. Nixon stays in charge until 1976. Vietnamesization along with continued air support continues. All US troops except advisors and special forces get pulled out and the draft ends. South Vietnam struggles, but still manages to limp on with the communists controlling small/medium amounts of their territory.

The main question is what happens in Cambodia and does China still find a pretext to invade North Vietnam in 1979 without the Khmer Rouge and Cambodian genocide occuring.

South Vietnam will survive with US support into 1991. It's not that difficult to keep it alive. The other main question is what happens to the conflict when the Cold War ends?

South Vietnam would probably resemble those banana republics in Latin America. When the Cold War ends, it's possible the VC would continue their insurgency akin to the NPA in the Philippines which 52 years later is still fighting the government.

If Nixon is less stupid in handling Watergate, AND if he decides to actually deploy the National guard divisions, then a failed peace negotiation might see a major redeployment. In order for the war to last till the 80s, the Americans need to feel that they have won and simply need to outlast some rebels.

Have the Guard units trainseparately, providing a different army to the one worn down in Vietnam, and then launch a general offensive into North Vietnam from the South, and a double sided amphibious invasion of Hanoi. Make it clear that you aren't interested in co querying the whole country, but force the main MVA units onto major combat. Following this, have the Americans essentially take over the South Vietnamese government MacArthur and Japan style . Have "old army" task groups launch assaultsnon known NVA/VC positions in SV, while having the Guard or "fresh army" units secure south Vietnam in sections. First secure the Capital areas, then secure the Mekong Delta, the islands, the areas south of the Mekong Delta. Have mobile battalions specifically designed to attack into surrounding countries to cut off NVA supply lines.

Give it a couple years, and expect heavy combat at first, but with Hanoi taken the American populace finally feel that they've won. After this you can transition to more local forces.

The reason that this pushes the war on so long is that there are still two hostile foreign powers (USSR, PRC) combining with the remnants of the NVA to wage war, creating a place for the insurgency to be promoted and capital to fund it.

Good points.

I could see the military forces Republic of Vietnam receive newer equipment from the U.S. such as the M60 Patton and the UH-60 Blackhawk.

S

sino American entente does not take place
Laos and Cambodia is invaded by Chinese to support Vietnam

I don't see China invading Cambodia. Both countries do not share a land border. Laos is more of possibility. However, the PLA invasion would be doubtful since their logistics at this period are crap. We saw how bad it was during China's brief 1979 war with Vietnam.

It might be possible with an early war PoD that changes the course of the war away from a quagmire. Perhaps a tip of the spear offensive in like 1966 to clear out VC/NVA sanctuary areas, the HCM-T and other targets in the north would give the advisors and SthV time to get their shit together, and that's what the US does periodically: advisors on the ground and the occasional local offensive when the opposition gets to tough to handle within SthV.

It would be like Desert Storm or the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

 

[Riain]

It would be like Desert Storm or the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

Yes, the ~1966 offensive would be high intensity ground warfare against valuable infrastructure and supply targets within striking distance of jump off points in Sth Vietnam as well as the high intensity simultaneous bombing of the 95 targets on the Rolling Thunder list including B52s against targets in the north.

It might need to be repeated a few times over the next decade or more, but between such high intensity periods would be COIN with advisors rather than US troops on the ground.

 

[Gillan1220]

Yes, the ~1966 offensive would be high intensity ground warfare against valuable infrastructure and supply targets within striking distance of jump off points in Sth Vietnam as well as the high intensity simultaneous bombing of the 95 targets on the Rolling Thunder list including B52s against targets in the north.

It might need to be repeated a few times over the next decade or more, but between such high intensity periods would be COIN with advisors rather than US troops on the ground.

Good point. Also, the U.S. has to destroy suspect supply routes coming from China and interdict Soviet freighters in the South China Sea.

I'm curious. So let's the Vietnam War really is dragged into the 1980s. How would U.S. military technology of the 1970s-80s fare in Vietnam such as the F-16, F-15, Apache, Blackhawk, the A-10 Thunderbolt, M2 Bradley, and the M1 Abrams fare?

Maybe the Bradley IFVs would lessen casualties taken in by the M113. Not so sure if the Abrams could fare better in Vietnam since tank warfare was not emphasize. If I remember correctly, the U.S. had the M24, M41, and the M48 in Vietnam while the North Vietnamese had the T-55 and the T-62.

I could see the M16A2 be better than the M16A1 in terms of jamming. Soldiers don't need to spray-and-pray since the A2 is burst fire.

We could also the Blackhawks fly alongside the Huey while the A-10 would do precision strikes along side the OV-10 Bronco.

 

[Riain]

Good point. Also, the U.S. has to destroy suspect supply routes coming from China and interdict Soviet freighters in the South China Sea.

They can't, not without provoking escalation from these two powers, but smashing what can be reached is useful.

 

[Gillan1220]

They can't, not without provoking escalation from these two powers, but smashing what can be reached is useful.

I guess that is why the Ho Chi Minh trail was bombed by B-52s. It did not even provoke escalation. Also similar in OTL where the U.S. Navy intercepts suspicious freighters on their way Syria and Venezuela.

 

[marathag]

Maybe the Bradley IFVs would lessen casualties taken in by the M113. Not so sure if the Abrams could fare better in Vietnam since tank warfare was not emphasize

Really, the big difference between the M113 and the Bradley is that of speed and firepower, not protection vs mines/IED/RPGs

M1 was made to fight the Soviets in West Germany, its wasted in Vietnam. The M48 or M60(that was never deployed there) would be fine

 

[Gillan1220]

Really, the big difference between the M113 and the Bradley is that of speed and firepower, not protection vs mines/IED/RPGs

M1 was made to fight the Soviets in West Germany, its wasted in Vietnam. The M48 or M60(that was never deployed there) would be fine

I see your point on the M1 Abrams. It might get bogged down in the swamps or rice fields. But keep in mind the Indonesians in modern times use the Leopard 2 in a similar tropical environment.

Would the Bradley suffer the same problem as Abrams in this setting? The Bradleys like their Abrams counterparts were meant to take on BMPs, BTRs, T-55s, T-62s, T-72s, and T-80s in the Fulda Gap.