In Vietnam, we took a hill and defeated the enemy; then we retreated and let the enemy take over.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Our purpose in Vietnam is to prevent the success of aggression. It is not conquest, it is not empire, it is not foreign bases, it is not domination. It is, simply put, just to prevent the forceful conquest of South Vietnam by North Vietnam.
The conclusion that many uniformed military came away from Vietnam with was that political interference, dominance of strategy and even tactics were a very bad way to conduct a war, and that indeed, if that was going to be our practice, that we shouldn't wage conflict again.
With Vietman, we found ourselves involved there before we really understood what was going on.
South Vietnam faces total defeat, and soon.
We are not retreating - we are advancing in another direction.
After every major conflict - World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the fall of the Soviet Union - what happened was that we ultimately hollowed out the force, largely by doing deep across-the-board cuts.
I think that Vietnam, many of us who served in Vietnam thought that was very wasteful, and to what end? To what end? What were we really there for? What were we really fighting for?
Militarily, we succeeded in Vietnam. We won every engagement we were involved in out there.
We didn't lose Vietnam. We quit Vietnam.
We moved in to help the Vietnamese defend their country and confront the Viet Cong.