No American Milatry Involvment in Vietnam???

randomkeith

Banned
#10 Report Post
post_new.gif
Today, 09:21 PM
randomkeith
user_online.gif
vbmenu_register("postmenu_1496389", true);
The Minjar Ninja
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minjar
Posts: 166


No American Involvment in Veitnam
What if America never became milatry involved in Veitnam, sure they supplied the South Veitnamese with guns and ammunition but never actually went in on the ground themselves.

I think we can asume that the communists would still have won, but a few years and thousands of casulties earlier.

Now what does the Khmer Rouge still come to power in Cambodia? and the communtists in Laos?? Given that they did in OTL i'd say yes.

But does Communism spread further in SE Asia, Thailand?? (Probally not) Burma (Distinct possabilty) Malaysia? (possible) Even East Bangladesh??? (Tricky one)
 
Actually the conventional historical view is that the Khmer Rouge were strongly helped by American actions in Cambodia.

A US that merely supplied arms/advisors to South Vietnam (and, I imagine, Cambodia and other SE Asian countries) would probably butterfly the Khmer Rouge gaining power.

Note too that in 1973 the Khmer Rouge were still contained, but quite strong, and only achieved their victory after the US halted aid to Cambodia. A US without the massive military involvement of OTL in SE Asia will have no problem keeping friendly governments in SE Asia well supplied.

Also note that the Vietnamese IOTL got rid of the Khmer Rouge by invading Cambodia, so even if they come to power in the ATL they're probably still going to get kicked out.


As for Laos? Same basic thing applies. Without US involvement in Viet Nam a normal(ish) government remains in power.


A US that sticks to advisors/weapons in SE Asia will wind up with a fairly favourable position even if they lose South Vietnam.
 
Top