AHC: Have the Vietnam war last until the early 1980s
- Thread starter Malone
- Start date
The Eugene McCarthy campaign (I think accurately) has been credited with accelerating the timeframe of the anti-war movement. At the beginning of 1968, most Americans still supported the course of the Vietnam War, mostly on the principle of not really knowing much about it. "The government says we're winning, so it must be true!" The Tet Offensive did a lot to convince Americans that maybe the war wouldn't be over 'any day now,' and it really stacked with McCarthy's primary challenge to plant the first seeds of 'Middle' American opposition to the war. Now, McCarthy was pretty much the last choice approached by Allard Lowenstein and Curtis Gans to run against Lyndon Johnson (Bobby Kennedy, James Gavin, George McGovern, and Lee Metcalf were all approached first), so let's say McCarthy retires early from the Senate. He was planning to do this IOTL, but delayed it to run as the anti-war candidate. Here he retires even earlier, and goes off to take a teaching position in Minnesota like he wanted.
Now let's assume Allard Lowenstein doesn't just run on his own (ironically, he would've been a better campaigner than McCarthy), and there's simply no anti-war Democrat in 1968. Johnson could stay on as President and feasibly beat Nixon ITTL, thus extending the war under Johnson, but let's say he doesn't run for the same health reasons as IOTL. If Humphrey wins he would probably pull out of Vietnam relatively early, but I can see Kennedy getting suckered into staying in by the military. Of course, Nixon winning anyway ITTL is the most likely means to keep the Vietnam War going besides Johnson running and winning again. Without McCarthy normalizing the anti-war position in 1968, McGovern is likely not the nominee in 1972. In this scenario, if not a majority, then a plurality of Americans could very well continue to support the Vietnam War in the early-to-mid 1970s. While this might not extend the war until the early 1980s, it could do so into the late 1970s.
Now let's assume Allard Lowenstein doesn't just run on his own (ironically, he would've been a better campaigner than McCarthy), and there's simply no anti-war Democrat in 1968. Johnson could stay on as President and feasibly beat Nixon ITTL, thus extending the war under Johnson, but let's say he doesn't run for the same health reasons as IOTL. If Humphrey wins he would probably pull out of Vietnam relatively early, but I can see Kennedy getting suckered into staying in by the military. Of course, Nixon winning anyway ITTL is the most likely means to keep the Vietnam War going besides Johnson running and winning again. Without McCarthy normalizing the anti-war position in 1968, McGovern is likely not the nominee in 1972. In this scenario, if not a majority, then a plurality of Americans could very well continue to support the Vietnam War in the early-to-mid 1970s. While this might not extend the war until the early 1980s, it could do so into the late 1970s.
William Westmoreland is injured by a mine valiantly saving a young soldier in the Fall of 1964. General Abrams is taken aside by Major General Lew Walt and Lieutenant General Victor Krulak (who fought insurgency in Latin America and helped plan the Marine CAP program) and convinced to split his forces in half between conventional units fighting the North Vietnamese regulars and troops that would be stationed in villages with local militia and ARVN. Abrams is uncertain about this strategy, but accepts trying it out after having it explained how it worked in the Philippines.
Abrams convinces Johnson to use professional troops rather then draftees and to call up the Guard and Reserves. The insurgency is reduced significantly by 1968 forcing North Vietnamese regulars to attempt a Tet like offensive to upset the apple cart in the 1968 election. The great intelligence flow from doing COIN significantly better detects what is going on and the U.S. military and Washington is ready for it when it happens. The war devolves into a Korea like situation with a low level insurgency in the background local troops mainly deal with.
Abrams convinces Johnson to use professional troops rather then draftees and to call up the Guard and Reserves. The insurgency is reduced significantly by 1968 forcing North Vietnamese regulars to attempt a Tet like offensive to upset the apple cart in the 1968 election. The great intelligence flow from doing COIN significantly better detects what is going on and the U.S. military and Washington is ready for it when it happens. The war devolves into a Korea like situation with a low level insurgency in the background local troops mainly deal with.
Last edited:
Avoid Americanization period of the war which killed the public support for war when American casualties become too much for the public. Rather, reinforce ARVN forces through an expeditionary force composed of anti communist nations that support America. The American government should incentivize through economic benefits/military benefits and good salary paid by the US government to those soldiers. Of course, heavily involvement of US special forces.
Watched a program a fair few years ago with a US General being interviewed regarding this and the US won the Vietnam War via wiping out the Viet Cong in the Tet Offensive and then being allowed to move to the border with China and thus wiping out the NVA.
Apart from the obvious flaw with the Chinese border.
The US General said that despite winning the war . . . the US would still need to keep around 30 to 40,000 personnel in theater.
What if an insurgency kicks off again with the left overs of the NVA etc . . . this war turning into a Northern Ireland style conflict?
Would that work in keeping the war going into the 80's?
regards filers.
Riain
Banned
For mine I would have the government spin the Tet offensive as akin to the battle of the Bulge, the last gasp of a defeated enemy. Scream this as loud as possible and unleash offensives, maybe into the DMZ and into sanctuary areas while unleashing an unlimited air campaign on the North.
Once this us done announce that since the enemy in the field has been defeated the US can go back to providing advisors and peacekeepers rather than combat troops. Once the US only has advisors they can easily stay in Vietnam until the 80s.
Once this us done announce that since the enemy in the field has been defeated the US can go back to providing advisors and peacekeepers rather than combat troops. Once the US only has advisors they can easily stay in Vietnam until the 80s.
Have Richard Nixon get four terms and keep it going because...I dunno, Biff Tanner is making bucks off it?
In all seriousness, keep the American soldiers mostly out of it and have both sides balance out their support enough to keep it going long-term.
In all seriousness, keep the American soldiers mostly out of it and have both sides balance out their support enough to keep it going long-term.
Not just into the DMZ but into North Vietnam and Laos. The US and South Vietnamese would win the conventional war but it would then bog down into an eternal insurgency supported from the PRC.
Last edited:
Riain
Banned
I agree, nothing too drastic, just spoiling offensives into sanctuary areas to destroy accumulated stores, combined with unrestricted bombing and possibly deep SF raids.
However this has be be accompanied by the message that Tet is what the US wanted, to bring the enemy out into the open to be defeated, and the furious offensives are the endgame and advisors are akin to the forces the US has in German and South Korea. Without this message the plan won't work.
Get an Australian General who's a veteran of Malaya and/or Borneo to run the counter insurgency campaign.
Riain
Banned
They're pretty thin on the ground, we only deployed a battalion there under British command.
+1 for reference. The owner of one of the original prop DeLoreans used to live one neighborhood over, had the Mr. Fusion on the back and everything.
How about neither the US or USSR caring enough to get involved and China having issues with Ho Chi Minh as per OTL?
What if we have a situation where Le Duan's and Ho's factions devolve into civil war and the Chinese intervene on the side of Le Duan while Ho enters secret negotiations for American support?
HO is strong enough to prevent or postpone the Tet offensive. The NLF remains powerful. Johnson re nominated and re-elected