thats a classic little book, (blue and pocket sized IIRC).  the poor yanks had to suffer the indignity of bangers and mash or lamb and mash - not their usual food fare!

I had a gander at "Lone Survivor" but it was a bit too "ra ra" for me....

 

 

Bought Paul Ham, Vietnam, The Australian War - excellent read and probably the best book on Australias role in Vietnam yet. He also gives an excellent precis on the history of Vietnam over 3000 years. One is left with the impression that it wouldn't have mattered what the ROE's could have been, the Vietnamese would have won in the end. (They've belted the chinese 3 times in 3 thousand years and it took them 900 years between drinks in one event, so they're pretty patient!)

also bought:

The Whirlwind War from the Center of Military History, US Army Wasgington DC (1995 print), Excellent history from the US Army on GW1.

Plan to pick up a copy of Ham's book tommorrow.

 

Did you see him on lateline the other night GF? Doesn't seem to be pushing any particular ideological barrow. Looking forward to reading it.

don't go to Borders, they don't even have it yet and claimed that its unavailable until end Nov!  I crossed over the road and got it at Angus and Robertson.  Paid full tote, but c'est la vie.....

Its actually quite good - and the history of why the Viets were ultimately destined to "win" is the best I've ever read.  If commanders had read a history of Vietnam as explained by Ham then they would have had second thoughts an maybe paused a little.  Its sobering reading, and one is left with the view that an ROE change would only have delayed the inevitable.  They're patient little buggers, and my admiration for their persistence and stamina has gone up accordingly.  I also have a greater appreciation of why I had such a hard time dealing with older Viet refugees in the late 70's. No wonder they hated me!

 

He does hook into the French and how they raped and pillaged the country for 90+ years - so he doesn't subscribe to the mythology of an eastern parisian paradise etc.....

 

The only std response has been pointing out that the americans were focussed on body counts and that we were focussed on counter insurgency, and that we had a number of stand up rows with our US colleagues on the stupidity of body counts as benchmarks to success.  McNamara was a first class tool.

Anyway, its relegated Sextons "War for the Asking" to the next shelf. ;)

 

As a side issue, you should probably subscribe to the newsletters at link They've had some very good articles on counter insurgency warfare, vietnam etc recently.  Although some authors are pure academics (alan stephens gets a good run when there are australian articles), the post analysis is still worth looking at.

 

Mission accomplished GF. A&R had it for $45 - $10 less than a couple of other places. I'm happy.

 

On your broader point, I have held for some time that holding together the South was always an exceptionally long shot. Had Diem done a few things differently and the Americans adopted the sort of tactics they ultimately employed under Abrams from the outset the RVN MIGHT have survived. But it is still a big if.

 

The recent school of though (if it can be called that) that the war had been 'won' by the early 70s & then was 'lost' because America pulled support from the RVN is just another round of political point scoring & wishful thinking that ignores Vietnamese history & a bunch of inconvenient facts.

 

The tradition of struggle & resistance you refer to was unfortunately not evenly distributed among all the Vietnamese engaged in the conflict. Had that been the case the South might have survived. As it was the Nth was the inheritor of that tradition by dint of it inhereting the heartland of traditional Vietnam. The South was part of a much more fluid, heterogenous & fractured tradition of Vietnamese life that lacked the same focus & determination the North could tap into.

 

Oh, ta for that link, I'll have a look around & see what there is to see.

FO,

 

Not exactly centred on military projects in particular, however, one really good cold war historical reference is -

 

Miller, David. 2001. The Cold War A Military History. ISBN 0712664777

 

I'm currently reading the rather solid history of SAC by Alwyn Lloyd. It is a big sucker, you could chock a tyre with it!