Canadians in Vietnam...

MacCaulay

Banned
MagExtShellshockKorea.jpg.aspx


...as good a place to put this photo, I think. I'm sure most Canadians have seen it. This is Private Heath Matthews, a signaler in A Company, 1st of the Royal Canadian Regiment in Korea.



I was reading about the contribution of Australian and New Zealander troops to the Vietnam War, and it got me thinking...suppose in 1966 or 67, the Canadian government was somehow strongarmed (through whatever means) into sending a force to Vietnam.

I'm throwing out the question (one that I've already kind of rolled around in my head)...what would that force's size be? Who would make it up? Etc.?
 
Does Canada have a Marine Corps equivalent? As to the question, probably a division or two, with more units being readied for replacements, as well as a few special forces and airbourne units.

The reason I ask about Marines is that I know there were ROK Marines serving in Vietnam.
 
Does Canada have a Marine Corps equivalent? As to the question, probably a division or two, with more units being readied for replacements, as well as a few special forces and airbourne units.

The reason I ask about Marines is that I know there were ROK Marines serving in Vietnam.

A division or two? Seriously, even at the height of the Cold War, Canada's military was never particuarly strong when compared to those of other Western nations. Furthermore, around the time of Vietnam, circa 1968 the Canadian armed forces were undergoing a tumultuous time of reorganisation. This combined with how unpopular the war was in Canada makes even the smallest contribution unlikley.

However, all of those considered, even if Canada did send some troops it would unlikley be anything other than a token force. A best, a pro-U.S. government may opt to send upto a full brigade of troops (Canada never really had much more than four full brigades by the late 1960's, including one based permanently in Germany), maybe a squadron or two and a destroyer on station. However, most likley it would be little more than a battalion of infantry, a battery of artillary, maybe a squadron of tanks and some other assorted military assets.

Russell
 
1967 is too late. We sent advisers in 1962 and our Caribou aircraft were delivered direct to Vietnam in 1964 but our first infantry battalion didn't deploy until 1965. Canada should be interested before the US decides to commit ground troops and should deploy it's own troops hard on the heels of the US commitment.

As for size, I don't know. Didn't Canada maintain a powerful armoured brigade group in Germany in the 60s? What's left after that is taken care of, a battalion or two?
 
I could see the possibility of an ad-hoc force being sent in during 67, but unfortunately with Unification in ’68, the new “CF” will struggle pretty tremendously to send anyone.

However, the RCAF(and later the Air Command) as well as the RCN(later Maritime Command), might actually due to their experience in Vietnam, gain the impetus to set up a proper corps of marines and an air defense regiment(since the army was historically and to this day, solely relied upon for all these tasks).
 

pnyckqx

Banned
Does Canada have a Marine Corps equivalent? As to the question, probably a division or two, with more units being readied for replacements, as well as a few special forces and airbourne units.

The reason I ask about Marines is that I know there were ROK Marines serving in Vietnam.
In point of fact, the Koreans sent two divisions to Vietnam. The Korean Capital (Tiger) division did quite well. They were in Vietnam from 1965-1973.
 
MagExtShellshockKorea.jpg.aspx


...as good a place to put this photo, I think. I'm sure most Canadians have seen it. This is Private Heath Matthews, a signaler in A Company, 1st of the Royal Canadian Regiment in Korea.



I was reading about the contribution of Australian and New Zealander troops to the Vietnam War, and it got me thinking...suppose in 1966 or 67, the Canadian government was somehow strongarmed (through whatever means) into sending a force to Vietnam.

I'm throwing out the question (one that I've already kind of rolled around in my head)...what would that force's size be? Who would make it up? Etc.?

Probably a light infantry batallion, some artillery, and a few helicopters.

If the involvement had dragged on into the 1970's then CF5 fighter bombers could have been sent as well.
 
National Lampoon put on a vignette comic White Dove (a parody
of Black Hawk or something like that) with the UN peace keepers,
including the Canadians of the '73 peace accords.

Many Canadians did serve in Vietnam, and the son of the Defence
Minister died as a Marine, Feb 1969 I think. Probably many of you
know that already, and the figures are approximately 30,000
went to Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_and_the_Vietnam_War#Canadians_in_the_U.S._military

As far as a Canadian presence in Vietnam, beyond the obligatory
hospital, etc. not worth it. It would cost more to the US in
bad feelings, especially with Trudeau, Mr. Canoeing to Cuba (1960) and
good buddy to Castro. Not saying Trudeau was against NATO or
DEW, but that he very much would have been against any earlier
presence in Vietnam. And the effect would have been a drop in the
bucket. Even in Korean War, they had hard time finding volunteers
within the military. Part of the reasons for Vietnam War Canadians,
apparently, were the much better benefits to veterans in the US
forces then and now. (In the Korean war, Ferdinand Demara, the
Great Imposter himself, faked his MD credentials and found it easy
to get sent to Korea with no vetting, but I digress.)

N.Z. and Australia are much closer to the action and had a vested
interest. Still, to this day, there is a crudely painted Get Out Of
Vietnam wall sign in Sydney, and the anti war group gained leaps
and bounds as time went on. I recall reading that the sign is almost
like HOLLYWOOD one in Los Angeles, for local activists.

Maybe this helps. Good Luck.

""To: NationalLampoonguy
Hey, on the NatLamp Archives site youze guys should bring back "White Dove" the prescient comic about the UN's peacekeepers.""
 
Trudeau wasn't against NATO? If he could've gotten away with quitting NATO and joining the NAM without getting tossed out of 24 Sussex nearly instantaneously he would have done so in an instant. What you need is another PM, which is fairly easy: Robert Winters wins the Liberal leadership instead of Trudeau. Alternatively Stanfield doesn't let the government off the hook when they lose the money vote in February '68 and an election is triggered in the midst of a Liberal leadership race. In the midst of all that chaos, Stanfield probably wins.
 
Didn't say it was not true, just that I was not saying it was. I am not so familiar with the man, as there are complexities. For example, his statement that "people have to realize that the US is something of a sovereign nation, too" or "I believe the people of Canada have elected
an imposter to the office, and now they are stuck with me" or something
like that. I dont have the exact quotes, but suffice to say he was a
sort of prankster type of person, maybe like a polished John Lennon
who somehow got elected. Any troops would have been withdrawn
under his tenure, and quickly. Enough of a politician pragmatist,
he was willing to mostly let the commitments to DEW and NATO
remain, from my limited knowledge of the subject. But please put
out more evidence to the contrary.
 
Trudeau wasn't against NATO? If he could've gotten away with quitting NATO and joining the NAM without getting tossed out of 24 Sussex nearly instantaneously he would have done so in an instant. What you need is another PM, which is fairly easy: Robert Winters wins the Liberal leadership instead of Trudeau. Alternatively Stanfield doesn't let the government off the hook when they lose the money vote in February '68 and an election is triggered in the midst of a Liberal leadership race. In the midst of all that chaos, Stanfield probably wins.

Rogue, keep in mind that by February 1968 the Forces have just been unified, to the particular anger of the Maritime Command (which saw pretty much all its traditions shitcanned) and by then the anti-war movement is in full blast. If Stanfield sends troops to Vietnam in the midst of all of that, Trudeau would rip him apart for it and people would listen, and Stanfield's next election sees him go down hard, and Trudeau promptly has a lot of anti-American ammo to work with, and yanks us out of NATO as a consequence. If you want troops in Vietnam, you'd have to be there by 1965 at the latest, part of America's building up of forces in the mid '60s. That requires Pearson to be willing to deploy to troops, and that's highly unlikely. Hence, I'd call the whole idea as highly unlikely.
 
Perhaps a pertinent question. Who will pay for Canada's deployment to Vietnam? IOTL only Australia and US paid the full cost of their involvement in Vietnam, the Asian allies like Korea had theirs paid for by the US.

Perhaps there's a TL in that, the US offers to pay for western Allies to send troops to Vietnam.
 
Rogue, keep in mind that by February 1968 the Forces have just been unified, to the particular anger of the Maritime Command (which saw pretty much all its traditions shitcanned) and by then the anti-war movement is in full blast. If Stanfield sends troops to Vietnam in the midst of all of that, Trudeau would rip him apart for it and people would listen, and Stanfield's next election sees him go down hard, and Trudeau promptly has a lot of anti-American ammo to work with, and yanks us out of NATO as a consequence. If you want troops in Vietnam, you'd have to be there by 1965 at the latest, part of America's building up of forces in the mid '60s. That requires Pearson to be willing to deploy to troops, and that's highly unlikely. Hence, I'd call the whole idea as highly unlikely.

Yep...

IMHO the closest the Canadians might have gotten to "helping" the US in Vietnam would have involved the Canadians agreeing to beef up their forces in Europe to allow the US to deploy more forces to Vietnam. Maybe have the Canadians deploy another Brigade to West Germany and have the US provide the needed heavy equipment for free or a nominal sum.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Okay...so we're kind of getting what I figured: either a flat out "no," or a deployment date in 1965-66. Possibly earlier with the Team (from Australia) or US Army trainers.

Just spitballing here to the Canadian politics junkies...what possible political chicanery could be pulled to have the Canadian Army have a force deployed in South Vietnam of near battalion-size by 1967?
 
You'd have to get a wider international coalition, perhaps the UK joining in- something that not even a Tory government would do. Pearson would not want to do it, the earliest you could get is Winters beating Trudeau in '68 and by '72 PC support for the issue defangs it but might see a massive protest vote for the NDP that reduces them to a minority government similar to OTL. Public opinion would be very much against it even with a bipartisan frontbench consensus.
 
You'd have to get a wider international coalition, perhaps the UK joining in- something that not even a Tory government would do. Pearson would not want to do it, the earliest you could get is Winters beating Trudeau in '68 and by '72 PC support for the issue defangs it but might see a massive protest vote for the NDP that reduces them to a minority government similar to OTL. Public opinion would be very much against it even with a bipartisan frontbench consensus.

By 1968, the anti-war movement was in full blast and American draft-dodgers were quite welcome in Canada at the time. The 1968 timeframe WILL NOT WORK. The latest possible time I could see this working is early 1966 at the absolute latest. Pearson is almost certainly want to do it. About the best real chance is to have Diefenbaker manage to stay as PM until 1965 and deploy Canadian Forces to assist the Americans, Aussies and Kiwis. And even with that, by 1968 the idea is going be downright radioactive, and no matter who is in charge by that time - Winters, Trudeau, Martin, Stanfield - is going to be under intense pressure to pull out of Vietnam. At best, the pressure cooker forces the troops out by the end of 1970. If its Trudeau as PM, it will almost certainly be followed by him saying that this is a sign of America's misguided intentions and promptly sees Canada withdraw from NATO and bring its troops home from Europe - and an even more demoralized Canadian Forces.
 
Top