Strange how simple soldiers of low rank (E-4, E-5) in Vietnam in 1963-1964 could come to the same conclusion Frank Snepp did without having the benefit of a college education. I was in VN as a linguist in 1963-64 and could see the incompetence and corruption on the ground, both in the ARVN and in Vietnamese society. We could see early on this was going to end badly. The truth will always surface and reveal the waste of resources and human lives. The USA was riding a dead horse.
The longer it lasted the more money the defense industry could suck out of the pockets of the American public. They also had to establish their opium fields for the smack epidemic that followed in the U.S. after the war, just like after the war in Afghanistan.
It was a very different time period. China fell to communism, South Korea was invaded by the north and now the Republic of Vietnam was threatened by the politburo in Hanoi. The threat of communist expansion was very real and there was a perceived need to stand up to military aggression even if our "allies" were...not quite up to the task.
I think the question is, "end badly" *_for whom?_* Cui bono? Who benefits? One (most) man's "waste of resources and human lives" is another man's containing China (Pentagon Papers), securing golden triangle/French connection, and entrenching transnational corporate/finance capital's "full spectrum domination" over the global working class to secure perpetual profit/class domination in the face of systemically inherent diminishing returns, strip-mining the planet and each other and ensuring the thanatos embrace towards the "common ruin of the contending classes". Indeed, the "cold" war wasn't very cold when, say, engulfed in napalm... Reminded of Michael Parenti, an excerpt from his piece Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty, which highlights the lacuna of class consciousness cultivated under the technologically mediated auspices of global US empire: _"In their perpetual confusion, some liberal critics conclude that foreign aid and IMF and World Bank structural adjustments “do not work”; the end result is less self-sufficiency and more poverty for the recipient nations, they point out. Why then do the rich member states continue to fund the IMF and World Bank? Are their leaders just less intelligent than the critics who keep pointing out to them that their policies are having the opposite effect?_ _No, it is the critics who are stupid not the western leaders and investors who own so much of the world and enjoy such immense wealth and success. They pursue their aid and foreign loan programs because such programs do work. The question is, work for whom? Cui bono?_ _The purpose behind their investments, loans, and aid programs is not to uplift the masses in other countries. That is certainly not the business they are in. The purpose is to serve the interests of global capital accumulation, to take over the lands and local economies of Third World peoples, monopolize their markets, depress their wages, indenture their labor with enormous debts, privatize their public service sector, and prevent these nations from emerging as trade competitors by not allowing them a normal development._ _In these respects, investments, foreign loans, and structural adjustments work very well indeed._ _The real mystery is: why do some people find such an analysis to be so improbable, a “conspiratorial” imagining? Why are they skeptical that U.S. rulers knowingly and deliberately pursue such ruthless policies (suppress wages, rollback environmental protections, eliminate the public sector, cut human services) in the Third World? These rulers are pursuing much the same policies right here in our own country!_ _Isn’t it time that liberal critics stop thinking that the people who own so much of the world---and want to own it all---are “incompetent” or “misguided” or “failing to see the unintended consequences of their policies”? You are not being very smart when you think your enemies are not as smart as you. They know where their interests lie, and so should we."_
Frank is a legend to many Vets. I still have a copy of Decent Interval. I knew of Shockley, by name only. I didn't know Frank had a TH-cam channel, but I am hooked on it now.
Very interesting analysis of the situation behind the scenes. I read Decent Interval a few years ago - thanks for your work in shining light on this important moment in history.
Outstanding reporting... may this shake loose dark habits of mendacity & complacency from all of us who were touched by this tragedy. "Ye shall know the Truth, & the Truth shall set you free..."
The end game on Vietnam was also the start game. You see, the real driver behind that stupid was was the Military Industrial Complex who got lucrative contracts for their brother-in-law companies. They made a bundle!!! But all cash cows have to eventually die.
The conclusion that "we lost because we underestimated how corrupt the Saigon regime was" isn't groundbreaking and actually ignores the entire premise of why the we were in Vietnam. We knew the Saigon regime was corrupt. It wasn't an accident. The reality is that the US was engaging in imperialism (previously supporting colonialism) in a country where most people opposed the US. By America's own estimates, the overwhelming majority of Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh and opposed any western backed candidate. So why did the US choose corrupt leaders? Because those were the only people willing to work with the US. We weren't looking to work with people with morals, ethics, or integrity (that would lead us to work with the communjst freedom fighters). Instead we sought out the minority Catholics who were willing to sell out their country to the west as long as they got kickbacks from the West. They would sell out their country and brutally oppressive the masses, and they would be paid in bloodmoney. It's no surprise that these people without ethics whose only goals were to get rich of course were corrupt and sold US arms and secrets for personal gain. These US soldiers and CIA officers think they gave uncovered some dark secret but they haven't. They are just as unaware of the situation as the people they criticize.
I've always respected Frank's tenacity in making sure all the obfuscation concerning accurate and credible information about the end of that war wasn't buried. No matter how it made certain people like Amb Martin look and especially the chain of events that led to abandoning those SV personnel that worked for us. I believe his refusal to shut up and disappear is responsible for our military doing a much better job of evacuating Panamanian civilians to South Florida following the invasion and capture of Noriega.
Confirmation of what was thought to be going on at the time, and continues to go on, that a blind man could see. You both are brave and honourable men for speaking out, and continuing to speak out. Such a waste of men and material which others have stated below. Looks like we are heading for another commitment now, Sad really.
America created the Communist North Vietnam during WWII way before the Democratic South Vietnam was created. One year after the Japanese army attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent a US mitary personnels to French Indochina. These US military personnels train the first Vietminh how created a booby traps, how to use assault rifle, and other military weapon. These Vietminh help save several US pilots, who's plane was shot down by the Japanese army in the Pacific. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt recognize Vietnam Independent from France but did not live to see it. But his Vice President Truman took a different approach and support the French to recolonize Vietnam and rejecting Ho Chi Minh letter of support for Vietnam independent from France. This cause Ho Chi Minh seeking support from the communist Soviet Union. US President Truman sent US military aids to French troops in Vietnam and even sent the first US MAAG to train the French troops in Vietnam guerrilla warfare. These US MAAG also later establish the creation of the Democratic South Vietnamese army. On May 7, 1954 France lost their right to Vietnam and all of Indochina after their major lost at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu. Vietnam emperor Bo Dai Nguyen appointed Ngo Dinh Diem as President of South Vietnam. And North Vietnam became Communist due to Soviet Union and Communist China support against the French. America military MAAG never left Vietnam because the US government make sure they will dictate on Vietnam affair from falling into Communist rule and dominos effect.
Excellent documentary on US strategy ,how flawed and Inept it was, and allowed to continue. Much to be learned still, like knowing, evaluating ,understanding the people your supporting. We didn't do that in Vietnam, and many other country's afterwards. The final tape played by the Lt. Colonel at the end of this documentary reflecting his dissolution about his mission reminds me of two other Lt. Colonels in that time frame who were first rate combat studs in there own right Lt. colonels Toney Herbert and David Hackworth. Vietnam sadly and tragically was in vain.
The corruption in Saigon and Washington was only one reason we lost the War. "Wars are won or lost before the battles are fought." This war was lost at Geneva in 54 when they agreed not to invade North Vietnam.
The reason why we lost is because they had the moral high ground. Vietnam has always been one country and the Vietnames people wanted white people to stop running it. The United States did nothing for democracy in VietNam all those years the French ran it. You think the Vietnamese voted for the French?
Mr. Snepps, unfortunately America didn't learn from Vietnam. The same mistakes happened in Afghanistan. Instead of mass bombing, they were using drones, same result.
A very important time in history. Thanks for not glossing it over. I still find myself asking why, aside from the desire to hide the truth to keep the aid going. It started out as inept denial but as things progressively got worse how could it have been allowed to continue? The damage was profound. Our country lost so much. Vietnam did, too. Was there some kind of hidden agenda?
We have to LEARN, my fellow Americans! We have to learn from our mistakes. How can we possibly support our disgraceful wars in the Middle East knowing what we know now in Vietnam?
@@uncleho1945 Where did you get 3 million from? It was much lower than that. My sources say about 800,000 Vietnamese deaths from 1961 - 1975. Give or take of course.
In Vietnam , the Americans were forced to leave , and now they are coming back . In Afghanistan the Americans were forced to go in , they probably will never want to go back to Afghan , it has absolutely nothing .
The US is a war mongering nation. The US breads its people for war. Take a look at Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction. Afghanistan, because you thought they took down the world trade centre.
I remember reading 'A Bright Shining Lie' , years ago - the account of the corruption/graft that permeated everything was incredible - and this was early on. I read somewhere of ARVN soldiers having to buy ammunition from their officers ! I recall seeing Frank Snepp in documentaries about the final days - talking about his worries over all the guys working for the US - be they drivers or translators or whatever - he seemed to be sharply intelligent , unlike some of the military guys.
I'm a proud Vietnam/Draft resistor. Intelligence failure? I don't think that is what failed in Vietnam. The simple fact was it was an Asian civil war for independence after years of colonialism. The Viet Cong were basically South Vietnamese fighting for their homeland. They had skin in the game. It was "personal" for them. Sending US troops, itself, was the "failure". They were fighting a patriot's war, the US were hired mercenaries.
They arrogantly think they have enough weapons to conquer and enough money to bribe,while simply recognizing Vietnam's independence was enough to turn the Ho Chi Minh government into a democratic and friendly one. USA has such wise politicians. That person was Senator W. Fulbright. During a hearing on the Vietnam War at the beginning, he said, "I also think the great nations , especially this one, are strong enough to make concessions without losing status and prestige of a great nation. On the contrary I think this will be one of the great victories,my greatest if I am wise and noble enough to settle this confrontation" The concession he spoke of was to let the Vietnamese people choose their own government, even though the victor was Ho Chi Minh.
Oh dear..here we go. The Viet Cong were Communists...who murdered their way to victory. They would not have won the war without the huge support from Communist China and the Soviet Union. Today....they are our allies against another Communist Menace the CCP. Times change....allies change....history does not.
Exactly! Reminded of Michael Parenti, an excerpt from his piece Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty, which highlights the lacuna of class consciousness cultivated under the technologically mediated auspices of global US empire: _"In their perpetual confusion, some liberal critics conclude that foreign aid and IMF and World Bank structural adjustments “do not work”; the end result is less self-sufficiency and more poverty for the recipient nations, they point out. Why then do the rich member states continue to fund the IMF and World Bank? Are their leaders just less intelligent than the critics who keep pointing out to them that their policies are having the opposite effect?_ _No, it is the critics who are stupid not the western leaders and investors who own so much of the world and enjoy such immense wealth and success. They pursue their aid and foreign loan programs because such programs do work. The question is, work for whom? Cui bono?_ _The purpose behind their investments, loans, and aid programs is not to uplift the masses in other countries. That is certainly not the business they are in. The purpose is to serve the interests of global capital accumulation, to take over the lands and local economies of Third World peoples, monopolize their markets, depress their wages, indenture their labor with enormous debts, privatize their public service sector, and prevent these nations from emerging as trade competitors by not allowing them a normal development._ _In these respects, investments, foreign loans, and structural adjustments work very well indeed._ _The real mystery is: why do some people find such an analysis to be so improbable, a “conspiratorial” imagining? Why are they skeptical that U.S. rulers knowingly and deliberately pursue such ruthless policies (suppress wages, rollback environmental protections, eliminate the public sector, cut human services) in the Third World? These rulers are pursuing much the same policies right here in our own country!_ _Isn’t it time that liberal critics stop thinking that the people who own so much of the world---and want to own it all---are “incompetent” or “misguided” or “failing to see the unintended consequences of their policies”? You are not being very smart when you think your enemies are not as smart as you. They know where their interests lie, and so should we."_
We did the same thing in central America, the middle east, and Afghanistan. I know how the company works, all about dem dollas. Trillions stolen and wasted.
Dear Mr. Snepp, what about Public Law 93-559(34b)4 congress passed signed by President Ford on 12/30/74? Kissinger hide this law to cover himself up, when ambassador Martin & French Ambassador requested on Apr.17, 1975?
The only way to have won that war was offer both the North and the South a better deal than the Chinese, even if the North wanted to be Maoist. They could have cut a deal with both sides with a hard border. If the North would have reneged on the deal it should have been clear that violation would result in annihilation and make the deal very public and ridiculously transparent so that if the North did violate it was on the record and what would follow had been warned. But as other commenters have noted it became a boon for the MIC, the CIA with opium and the communists inside the US Gov who wanted the war to tear the country apart. We've never recovered from it.
The reason why we lost is because they had the moral high ground. Vietnam has always been one country and the Vietnames people wanted white people to stop running it. The United States did nothing for democracy in VietNam all those years the French ran it. You think the Vietnamese voted for the French?
You are right.American presidents thought they could force the Vietnamese to give up their will to independence for their country. That is naive arrogance. You will have to pay a heavy price if you oppose the Vietnamese people's aspirations for independence and unification. That is the result of a study by the US Department of Defense.(The vietnam war) which China cannot do even though it had dominated Vietnam for thousand of years and still has to recognize Vietnam's independence
The Vietnamese did not vote for the French, the Americans, nor did they vote for the American henchmen in Saigon. So the US missed an opportunity for which the US had to pay with the lives of 58,000 young soldiers. , $1.4 trillion and killed 3 million Vietnamese and still failed.
@@pkn920 Viet Nam has always been one country for a thousand years or more. The Viet Cong were Vietnamese from the south who wanted the French and Americans gone. When a vote was taken the majority of the people from the south wanted unification. America ignored the results. Do you know that Viet Nam is one of the worlds top 10 economies? High education rate. Low poverty levels. 300,000 Americans vacation there every year. You think they regret France and America leaving?
@@Itsatz010 best economies in the world, seriously? What vote are you talking about? Did they vote after 1975 when they put all the South Vietnamese in re education camps? Viet Cong and Southerners who supported the North are represented in the government in Hanoi-not!
The British lost the 13 colonies Probably the same way Underestimating the enemy Cornwallis trapped in yorktown France assisting the rebels The British finally withdrew in 1783 As the americans did in vietnam 1975!
And you don’t understand why the ambassador did what he did.He was trying to prolong the for as long as possible so the SVN could strengthen its force posture before the full withdrawal.You both sound like you wanted the communists to win
@@havu-oj4qh cowards ? Like the coward Vietcong who go into villages and cut the limbs off children because their parents wouldn't fight with them .EAD Northy
This is partly true. Martin was attempting to maintain an image of a strong Saigon, of course why wouldn't he. Showing your weakness to the enemy never ends well. But hiding factual intelligence from the those that needed to know didn't help either. Put simply SVN needed probably another five years minimum to get its act together. A period of time Hanoi was never going to allow them to have.
But apparently the Americans have not learned the lesson you give in conclusion about the knowledge of its proxies; with regard to different conflicts in which the US was involved after VietNam!
He is at the top of this list, for allowing communist intelligence to infiltrate all South Vietnamese government organizations, from the local government to the Saigon presidential palace. He is a shameless liar
Well Mr.Snepp,if the Geneva agreements had been implemented;there would have been a vote(nationwide)and the VietMinh would have won;that and the guts v butter debate would have the butter side would have prevailed. That would have resulted in the dismantling of the Military Industrial Complex,thus taxdollars would have gone to infrastructure and “social programs. You know all this,but insisted on just stacking the bullocks higher. VietNam was the beginning of what we(us)are dealing with now.🀄️
Then South Vietnamese president Nguyen van thieu was assured after the ‘73 accords that the US would absolutely intervene if d NVA had relented. The NVA obviously did in ‘75. That orchestrated a mike Tyson prime vs an 80 year old man like situation if you will, south Vietnam was a swimming duck in crocodile waters it absolutely stood no chance whatsoever against a seasoned toe to toe American foe. Then President Ford and the US congress should have held a long term view, what would happen if American supremacy was removed after all the lives and resources lost, they should have thought. Unfortunately it was as removed. 58,000 US lives and tens of billions of 1970s dollars went down the drain. The US has felt the aftershocks worldwide to date following the fall of saigon since. This is expected to continue for a very very, very long time. It was in my view the beginning of d end of American dominance post world war 2. But America will rise again, it may have been down since, but it ain’t out. Just like Rocky Balboa in III, great America will redeem itself, Captain America style. Coming to yawll live from Singapore
Frank , thank you for your Govt service . You would make a great reporter for 60 minutes or anyone 👍🏻.As a side note Ambassador Martin is and was a fool and we should have had a counterintelligence program on the South Vietnamese Government and Military
Don't show off smarter than the insiders. The CIA killed the South Vietnamese president when he refused to let the US send more troops into South Vietnam.
The only thing I disagree with is the war was already lost. Not even perfect intelligence (far from the case) wouldve saved S.V. America wanted nothing to do with this country after 1973. It's almost legendary how our agencies were throughout the war
You know during the Vietnam War there were a lot case of US ground troops commit a lot of attrocities toward many South Vietnamese villagers during their "Search and Destroy Mission." Many were never reported and a lot was being covered up by US General William Childs Westmoreland. There were many US ground troops saw the attrocities done by their fellow American troops and did nothing. While other participate. Vietnamese peoples were the victim of the Vietnam War. Even though many Vietnamese didn't start the War and didn't ask for it. That was the decision by the American peoples who voted for Democrats President JF Kennedy and LB Johnson as their Commander in Chief for their country. And Democrats President Truman who brought Communist support to Vietnam by allowing and supporting France to reclaim Vietnam as their colony. A country who value their freedom and independence from England. Deny other country of their own. America has never a democracy country. America is a Republic.
Strange how simple soldiers of low rank (E-4, E-5) in Vietnam in 1963-1964 could come to the same conclusion Frank Snepp did without having the benefit of a college education. I was in VN as a linguist in 1963-64 and could see the incompetence and corruption on the ground, both in the ARVN and in Vietnamese society. We could see early on this was going to end badly. The truth will always surface and reveal the waste of resources and human lives. The USA was riding a dead horse.
The longer it lasted the more money the defense industry could suck out of the pockets of the American public. They also had to establish their opium fields for the smack epidemic that followed in the U.S. after the war, just like after the war in Afghanistan.
True!!
It was a very different time period. China fell to communism, South Korea was invaded by the north and now the Republic of Vietnam was threatened by the politburo in Hanoi. The threat of communist expansion was very real and there was a perceived need to stand up to military aggression even if our "allies" were...not quite up to the task.
@@jdfields711 In the asshole of the Yanks,you are filthy maggots. None care of you ,dude!
I think the question is, "end badly" *_for whom?_* Cui bono? Who benefits?
One (most) man's "waste of resources and human lives" is another man's containing China (Pentagon Papers), securing golden triangle/French connection, and entrenching transnational corporate/finance capital's "full spectrum domination" over the global working class to secure perpetual profit/class domination in the face of systemically inherent diminishing returns, strip-mining the planet and each other and ensuring the thanatos embrace towards the "common ruin of the contending classes". Indeed, the "cold" war wasn't very cold when, say, engulfed in napalm...
Reminded of Michael Parenti, an excerpt from his piece Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty, which highlights the lacuna of class consciousness cultivated under the technologically mediated auspices of global US empire:
_"In their perpetual confusion, some liberal critics conclude that foreign aid and IMF and World Bank structural adjustments “do not work”; the end result is less self-sufficiency and more poverty for the recipient nations, they point out. Why then do the rich member states continue to fund the IMF and World Bank? Are their leaders just less intelligent than the critics who keep pointing out to them that their policies are having the opposite effect?_
_No, it is the critics who are stupid not the western leaders and investors who own so much of the world and enjoy such immense wealth and success. They pursue their aid and foreign loan programs because such programs do work. The question is, work for whom? Cui bono?_
_The purpose behind their investments, loans, and aid programs is not to uplift the masses in other countries. That is certainly not the business they are in. The purpose is to serve the interests of global capital accumulation, to take over the lands and local economies of Third World peoples, monopolize their markets, depress their wages, indenture their labor with enormous debts, privatize their public service sector, and prevent these nations from emerging as trade competitors by not allowing them a normal development._
_In these respects, investments, foreign loans, and structural adjustments work very well indeed._
_The real mystery is: why do some people find such an analysis to be so improbable, a “conspiratorial” imagining? Why are they skeptical that U.S. rulers knowingly and deliberately pursue such ruthless policies (suppress wages, rollback environmental protections, eliminate the public sector, cut human services) in the Third World? These rulers are pursuing much the same policies right here in our own country!_
_Isn’t it time that liberal critics stop thinking that the people who own so much of the world---and want to own it all---are “incompetent” or “misguided” or “failing to see the unintended consequences of their policies”? You are not being very smart when you think your enemies are not as smart as you. They know where their interests lie, and so should we."_
Frank is a legend to many Vets. I still have a copy of Decent Interval. I knew of Shockley, by name only. I didn't know Frank had a TH-cam channel, but I am hooked on it now.
Very interesting analysis of the situation behind the scenes. I read Decent Interval a few years ago - thanks for your work in shining light on this important moment in history.
Frank, I'm sorry you got such a raw deal. Hang in there and thank you for you service.-Paul
Outstanding reporting... may this shake loose dark habits of mendacity & complacency from all of us who were touched by this tragedy. "Ye shall know the Truth, & the Truth shall set you free..."
Such a terrible waste of American lives and yet we did the same mistake in Afghanistan.
@@EsterStPaul Same failed policy.
Iraq too.
yes - so much of what they discussed made me think of Afghanistan
The end game on Vietnam was also the start game. You see, the real driver behind that stupid was was the Military Industrial Complex who got lucrative contracts for their brother-in-law companies. They made a bundle!!! But all cash cows have to eventually die.
Thanks for your service Mr. Snepp. God Bless.
The conclusion that "we lost because we underestimated how corrupt the Saigon regime was" isn't groundbreaking and actually ignores the entire premise of why the we were in Vietnam.
We knew the Saigon regime was corrupt. It wasn't an accident. The reality is that the US was engaging in imperialism (previously supporting colonialism) in a country where most people opposed the US.
By America's own estimates, the overwhelming majority of Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh and opposed any western backed candidate. So why did the US choose corrupt leaders? Because those were the only people willing to work with the US. We weren't looking to work with people with morals, ethics, or integrity (that would lead us to work with the communjst freedom fighters). Instead we sought out the minority Catholics who were willing to sell out their country to the west as long as they got kickbacks from the West. They would sell out their country and brutally oppressive the masses, and they would be paid in bloodmoney.
It's no surprise that these people without ethics whose only goals were to get rich of course were corrupt and sold US arms and secrets for personal gain.
These US soldiers and CIA officers think they gave uncovered some dark secret but they haven't. They are just as unaware of the situation as the people they criticize.
I've always respected Frank's tenacity in making sure all the obfuscation concerning accurate and credible information about the end of that war wasn't buried.
No matter how it made certain people like Amb Martin look and especially the chain of events that led to abandoning those SV personnel that worked for us.
I believe his refusal to shut up and disappear is responsible for our military doing a much better job of evacuating Panamanian civilians to South Florida following the invasion and capture of Noriega.
Thanks for your service Colonel. God Bless.
Confirmation of what was thought to be going on at the time, and continues to go on, that a blind man could see. You both are brave and honourable men for speaking out, and continuing to speak out. Such a waste of men and material which others have stated below. Looks like we are heading for another commitment now, Sad really.
Thank You for Your Service
America created the Communist North Vietnam during WWII way before the Democratic South Vietnam was created. One year after the Japanese army attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent a US mitary personnels to French Indochina. These US military personnels train the first Vietminh how created a booby traps, how to use assault rifle, and other military weapon. These Vietminh help save several US pilots, who's plane was shot down by the Japanese army in the Pacific. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt recognize Vietnam Independent from France but did not live to see it. But his Vice President Truman took a different approach and support the French to recolonize Vietnam and rejecting Ho Chi Minh letter of support for Vietnam independent from France. This cause Ho Chi Minh seeking support from the communist Soviet Union. US President Truman sent US military aids to French troops in Vietnam and even sent the first US MAAG to train the French troops in Vietnam guerrilla warfare. These US MAAG also later establish the creation of the Democratic South Vietnamese army. On May 7, 1954 France lost their right to Vietnam and all of Indochina after their major lost at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu. Vietnam emperor Bo Dai Nguyen appointed Ngo Dinh Diem as President of South Vietnam. And North Vietnam became Communist due to Soviet Union and Communist China support against the French. America military MAAG never left Vietnam because the US government make sure they will dictate on Vietnam affair from falling into Communist rule and dominos effect.
Sounds a lot like the withdraw of Afghanistan i guess we have learned nothing!
1
Excellent documentary on US strategy ,how flawed and Inept it was, and allowed to continue. Much to be learned still, like knowing, evaluating ,understanding the people your supporting. We didn't do that in Vietnam, and many other country's afterwards. The final tape played by the Lt. Colonel at the end of this documentary reflecting his dissolution about his mission reminds me of two other Lt. Colonels in that time frame who were first rate combat studs in there own right Lt. colonels Toney Herbert and David Hackworth. Vietnam sadly and tragically was in vain.
The corruption in Saigon and Washington was only one reason we lost the War. "Wars are won or lost before the battles are fought." This war was lost at Geneva in 54 when they agreed not to invade North Vietnam.
Can not make new high rank or steal millions of dollars if there is no War.
God Bless You Colonel Remember You forever for Your Services Very Sad Ending
The reason why we lost is because they had the moral high ground. Vietnam has always been one country and the Vietnames people wanted white people to stop running it. The United States did nothing for democracy in VietNam all those years the French ran it. You think the Vietnamese voted for the French?
Colonel Shockley died on 6 March 2020 and is buried at Beaufort National Cemetery in South Carolina.
I am so not surprised. Our brave and highly competent soldiers, pilots and Navy were so misused.
the most brave were pilots of helicopter in 30/4/1975
Mr. Snepps, unfortunately America didn't learn from Vietnam. The same mistakes happened in Afghanistan. Instead of mass bombing, they were using drones, same result.
there are no dead 50K+ US in Afghan. Not even close. And Hillary lost to a game show host
A very important time in history. Thanks for not glossing it over. I still find myself asking why, aside from the desire to hide the truth to keep the aid going. It started out as inept denial but as things progressively got worse how could it have been allowed to continue? The damage was profound. Our country lost so much. Vietnam did, too. Was there some kind of hidden agenda?
God Bless You Mr Frank Snepp Thank You For You Service Why did we Leave Our War Dogs Abandoned to Fend for Themselves
samuel lmao what kinda name is that for a bhaskar lmaoo
Thank You for your service Mr. Snepp.
The CIA was an apprentice to communist intelligence
We have to LEARN, my fellow Americans! We have to learn from our mistakes. How can we possibly support our disgraceful wars in the Middle East knowing what we know now in Vietnam?
@@uncleho1945 Where did you get 3 million from? It was much lower than that. My sources say about 800,000 Vietnamese deaths from 1961 - 1975. Give or take of course.
In Vietnam, people live in villages, so they know each other's generations. So they can be estimated
In Vietnam , the Americans were forced to leave , and now they are coming back . In Afghanistan the Americans were forced to go in , they probably will never want to go back to Afghan , it has absolutely nothing .
The US is a war mongering nation. The US breads its people for war. Take a look at Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction. Afghanistan, because you thought they took down the world trade centre.
What the DoD learned was CONTROL THE MEDIA.
I remember reading 'A Bright Shining Lie' , years ago - the account of the corruption/graft that permeated everything was incredible - and this was early on. I read somewhere of ARVN soldiers having to buy ammunition from their officers ! I recall seeing Frank Snepp in documentaries about the final days - talking about his worries over all the guys working for the US - be they drivers or translators or whatever - he seemed to be sharply intelligent , unlike some of the military guys.
I'm a proud Vietnam/Draft resistor. Intelligence failure? I don't think that is what failed in Vietnam. The simple fact was it was an Asian civil war for independence after years of colonialism. The Viet Cong were basically South Vietnamese fighting for their homeland. They had skin in the game. It was "personal" for them. Sending US troops, itself, was the "failure". They were fighting a patriot's war, the US were hired mercenaries.
They arrogantly think they have enough weapons to conquer and enough money to bribe,while simply recognizing Vietnam's independence was enough to turn the Ho Chi Minh government into a democratic and friendly one.
USA has such wise politicians. That person was Senator W. Fulbright. During a hearing on the Vietnam War at the beginning, he said, "I also think the great nations , especially this one, are strong enough to make concessions without losing status and prestige of a great nation. On the contrary I think this will be one of the great victories,my greatest if I am wise and noble enough to settle this confrontation"
The concession he spoke of was to let the Vietnamese people choose their own government, even though the victor was Ho Chi Minh.
Oh dear..here we go. The Viet Cong were Communists...who murdered their way to victory. They would not have won the war without the huge support from Communist China and the Soviet Union. Today....they are our allies against another Communist Menace the CCP. Times change....allies change....history does not.
@@bocagoodtimes1460 And part of that history is I didn't waste my life for all that BS that does change.
you are right
Exactly!
Reminded of Michael Parenti, an excerpt from his piece Mystery: How Wealth Creates Poverty, which highlights the lacuna of class consciousness cultivated under the technologically mediated auspices of global US empire:
_"In their perpetual confusion, some liberal critics conclude that foreign aid and IMF and World Bank structural adjustments “do not work”; the end result is less self-sufficiency and more poverty for the recipient nations, they point out. Why then do the rich member states continue to fund the IMF and World Bank? Are their leaders just less intelligent than the critics who keep pointing out to them that their policies are having the opposite effect?_
_No, it is the critics who are stupid not the western leaders and investors who own so much of the world and enjoy such immense wealth and success. They pursue their aid and foreign loan programs because such programs do work. The question is, work for whom? Cui bono?_
_The purpose behind their investments, loans, and aid programs is not to uplift the masses in other countries. That is certainly not the business they are in. The purpose is to serve the interests of global capital accumulation, to take over the lands and local economies of Third World peoples, monopolize their markets, depress their wages, indenture their labor with enormous debts, privatize their public service sector, and prevent these nations from emerging as trade competitors by not allowing them a normal development._
_In these respects, investments, foreign loans, and structural adjustments work very well indeed._
_The real mystery is: why do some people find such an analysis to be so improbable, a “conspiratorial” imagining? Why are they skeptical that U.S. rulers knowingly and deliberately pursue such ruthless policies (suppress wages, rollback environmental protections, eliminate the public sector, cut human services) in the Third World? These rulers are pursuing much the same policies right here in our own country!_
_Isn’t it time that liberal critics stop thinking that the people who own so much of the world---and want to own it all---are “incompetent” or “misguided” or “failing to see the unintended consequences of their policies”? You are not being very smart when you think your enemies are not as smart as you. They know where their interests lie, and so should we."_
We did the same thing in central America, the middle east, and Afghanistan. I know how the company works, all about dem dollas. Trillions stolen and wasted.
Dear Mr. Snepp, what about Public Law 93-559(34b)4 congress passed signed by President Ford on 12/30/74? Kissinger hide this law to cover himself up, when ambassador Martin & French Ambassador requested on Apr.17, 1975?
Just what happened in Afghanistan
Even worse in Afghanistan…. see America’s departure.
killing inocents
Incredible information. Thank you.
Kissinger should be jail..
This guy has a great anchor voice
We were on the wrong side...french hated being occupied by Germans but yet preoccupied their colonies . Makes ya wonder.
This is excellent reporting on Afghanistan.
The only way to have won that war was offer both the North and the South a better deal than the Chinese, even if the North wanted to be Maoist. They could have cut a deal with both sides with a hard border. If the North would have reneged on the deal it should have been clear that violation would result in annihilation and make the deal very public and ridiculously transparent so that if the North did violate it was on the record and what would follow had been warned. But as other commenters have noted it became a boon for the MIC, the CIA with opium and the communists inside the US Gov who wanted the war to tear the country apart. We've never recovered from it.
Is this about Afganistan or Vietnam?
both
@@thuankhong you forgot Iraq.
They could have sent something. News reports were showing the North invading the South Vietnamese. That's enough to justify sending something.
blows my mind how this has less than 5k views. censorship? maybe? good lord.
The peak of caring was early to mid-70s for the USA. The USA is too crooked to waste time on old crooked schemes.
Supporting a corrupting regime is always a disaster. This had happened before in China’s civil war.
Awesome 😊
Sounds like Afganistan?
Iraq too.
The old axioms of war are forever true
KNOW THY ENEMY
KNOW THY ALLIES
KNOW THY SELF
US KNOW NOTHING
It's quite obvious that everything they are saying was true if you've looked into this beyond this video.
The reason why we lost is because they had the moral high ground. Vietnam has always been one country and the Vietnames people wanted white people to stop running it. The United States did nothing for democracy in VietNam all those years the French ran it. You think the Vietnamese voted for the French?
You are right.American presidents thought they could force the Vietnamese to give up their will to independence for their country. That is naive arrogance. You will have to pay a heavy price if you oppose the Vietnamese people's aspirations for independence and unification. That is the result of a study by the US Department of Defense.(The vietnam war) which China cannot do even though it had dominated Vietnam for thousand of years and still has to recognize Vietnam's independence
The Vietnamese did not vote for the French, the Americans, nor did they vote for the American henchmen in Saigon. So the US missed an opportunity for which the US had to pay with the lives of 58,000 young soldiers. , $1.4 trillion and killed 3 million Vietnamese and still failed.
Such a simplistic one sided view. If unification were that important, why were re-education camps necessary?
@@pkn920 Viet Nam has always been one country for a thousand years or more. The Viet Cong were Vietnamese from the south who wanted the French and Americans gone. When a vote was taken the majority of the people from the south wanted unification. America ignored the results. Do you know that Viet Nam is one of the worlds top 10 economies? High education rate. Low poverty levels. 300,000 Americans vacation there every year. You think they regret France and America leaving?
@@Itsatz010 best economies in the world, seriously? What vote are you talking about? Did they vote after 1975 when they put all the South Vietnamese in re education camps? Viet Cong and Southerners who supported the North are represented in the government in Hanoi-not!
The British lost the 13 colonies
Probably the same way
Underestimating the enemy
Cornwallis trapped in yorktown
France assisting the rebels
The British finally withdrew in 1783
As the americans did in vietnam 1975!
And you don’t understand why the ambassador did what he did.He was trying to prolong the for as long as possible so the SVN could strengthen its force posture before the full withdrawal.You both sound like you wanted the communists to win
No American ever wanted to die for you cowards and fools
@@havu-oj4qh cowards ? Like the coward Vietcong who go into villages and cut the limbs off children because their parents wouldn't fight with them .EAD Northy
The braver ,the smarter must win
IT WAS THEIR COUNTRY.
This is partly true. Martin was attempting to maintain an image of a strong Saigon, of course why wouldn't he. Showing your weakness to the enemy never ends well. But hiding factual intelligence from the those that needed to know didn't help either. Put simply SVN needed probably another five years minimum to get its act together. A period of time Hanoi was never going to allow them to have.
No wonder the USA and South Vietnam lost, and lost bad.
But apparently the Americans have not learned the lesson you give in conclusion about the knowledge of its proxies; with regard to different conflicts in which the US was involved after VietNam!
Mr Frank Snepp Please Kindly see the perpetrators who gave the Dogs to be Dumped in Vietnam to Justice
He is at the top of this list, for allowing communist intelligence to infiltrate all South Vietnamese government organizations, from the local government to the Saigon presidential palace.
He is a shameless liar
He can't gave himself to Justice
Well Mr.Snepp,if the Geneva agreements had been implemented;there would have been a vote(nationwide)and the VietMinh would have won;that and the guts v butter debate would have the butter side would have prevailed.
That would have resulted in the dismantling of the Military Industrial Complex,thus taxdollars would have gone to infrastructure and “social programs.
You know all this,but insisted on just stacking the bullocks higher.
VietNam was the beginning of what we(us)are dealing with now.🀄️
Proctological-Examinations…Colonoscopies…
should not have been there in the first place.
Then South Vietnamese president Nguyen van thieu was assured after the ‘73 accords that the US would absolutely intervene if d NVA had relented. The NVA obviously did in ‘75. That orchestrated a mike Tyson prime vs an 80 year old man like situation if you will, south Vietnam was a swimming duck in crocodile waters it absolutely stood no chance whatsoever against a seasoned toe to toe American foe. Then President Ford and the US congress should have held a long term view, what would happen if American supremacy was removed after all the lives and resources lost, they should have thought. Unfortunately it was as removed. 58,000 US lives and tens of billions of 1970s dollars went down the drain. The US has felt the aftershocks worldwide to date following the fall of saigon since. This is expected to continue for a very very, very long time. It was in my view the beginning of d end of American dominance post world war 2.
But America will rise again, it may have been down since, but it ain’t out. Just like Rocky Balboa in III, great America will redeem itself, Captain America style.
Coming to yawll live from Singapore
Nixon promised to get it over with, but he couldn't do this because the US Congress blocked this possibility of intervention
The US Congress did not allow the US president to do what he promised.
The Paris Agreement just so that America's departure was not humiliating
@@thuankhong Nixon knew that Congress would not follow up, so he owns this.
What lost the war was U.S. failure to bomb Hanoi into oblivion.
30,000 ton bomb in 12 days wasn't enough for bloodlust of you beasts?
Frank , thank you for your Govt service . You would make a great reporter for 60 minutes or anyone 👍🏻.As a side note Ambassador Martin is and was a fool and we should have had a counterintelligence program on the South Vietnamese Government and Military
Don't show off smarter than the insiders. The CIA killed the South Vietnamese president when he refused to let the US send more troops into South Vietnam.
This guy wasn't fool when VC's spies were everywhere in South Vietnam? The US molded the Republic of Vietnam, when you lost, you only blame it?
48:25 harry summers
Never bombing North Korea.. smh
nah people was tired of the lies and propaganda
..it was intelligent fail..
We already knew the south Vietnamese couldn't hold by themselves that's why we were there lol.
But the communists didn't leave the Americans there!
The only thing I disagree with is the war was already lost. Not even perfect intelligence (far from the case) wouldve saved S.V. America wanted nothing to do with this country after 1973. It's almost legendary how our agencies were throughout the war
escap from vietnam in humiliating way say it all
You know during the Vietnam War there were a lot case of US ground troops commit a lot of attrocities toward many South Vietnamese villagers during their "Search and Destroy Mission." Many were never reported and a lot was being covered up by US General William Childs Westmoreland. There were many US ground troops saw the attrocities done by their fellow American troops and did nothing. While other participate. Vietnamese peoples were the victim of the Vietnam War. Even though many Vietnamese didn't start the War and didn't ask for it. That was the decision by the American peoples who voted for Democrats President JF Kennedy and LB Johnson as their Commander in Chief for their country. And Democrats President Truman who brought Communist support to Vietnam by allowing and supporting France to reclaim Vietnam as their colony. A country who value their freedom and independence from England. Deny other country of their own. America has never a democracy country. America is a Republic.
This crap went all the up to Tricky Dick…looking for an easy out!
Same as use screwed in iraq and afghanistan. There is no war usa won lol