"Vietnam's Forgotten Army: Heroism and Betrayal in the ARVN" by Dr. Andrew A. Wiest

[@Kab-x7z]

Thank you Dr. Wiest for your outstanding talk about ARVN. I have read many books about Viet Nam war and sadly most of them barely or never mention about them. I will be saved this talk for my grandchildren.

[@Mikelowrey90]

ARVN FOREVER!

[@dunguyen7571]

We forgot to mention ARVN disabled veterans ,VC kicked them and their families out the house the land They got to live on the street until this days there are about twenty thousand ARVN disabled in VN now once in a while they got few dollars from their old friends over Sea

[@hinoka2911]

Cry about that đù nguyen

[@thethaovatoquoc312]

@@hinoka2911 Death tolls by butchers of 20th century: Lenin 8 million Stalin 20 million Mao 80 million Hu Kwang aka Ho Quang aka Ho Chi Minh 2 million Pol-Pot 2 million What did these mass murdering lowlifes have in common?

[@CJinsoo]

By developing a more accurate picture of the ARVN, it is likely to upset those who hold the belief that the war could not be won-no matter what.... I really appreciate the comments on the possibility of winning the war. But I disagree that some of the tactics “were not in the cards”. In a “what if” approach, it is an option under consideration. Still, I think the approach presented is insightful and likely more practical. Had Vietnam not included the deployment of U.S. troops as the main fighting force, I wonder what would have happened to the counter-culture and the political landscape in the United States? At the very least it slows it down, and the transformation of the Democratic party to a more extreme left party, is slowed for many years.

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Thank you for giving such well-deserved recognition.

[@georgelabe-assimo4365]

As I listened to this, I’m starting to really feel that a lot of the blunders with the ARVN both in their battles and their overall reputation was the Americans’ fault either due to their faulty tactics or their ego. It’s sickening how I’m just seeing this happen.

[@arminhillman7956]

Excellent lecture.

[@itztrieuz]

This is the first time in my life spent 1 hour listen to some random guy talking about ARVN

[@scottmccallum5861]

Great lecture

[@TellTheSpartans]

The South was winning the war in 1963 - Washington was not being "lied to" by Saigon - when Diem was removed in a Washington inspired coup. As Taylor commented in January, 1965, Diem was holding South Vietnam together. When he was removed great damage was done to the civilian and military leadership as those loyal to him were also removed. Westmoreland remarked later that two years were lost as a consequence. The U.S. had to carry the burden in 1965 because the nature of the war was changing, and the NVA was beginning to intervene in late 1964. If the U.S. had not done so the South would have fallen then. The role of the ARVN at that point became pacification - a sensible use of Vietnamese soldiers. The ARVN had a shortage of good officers as it expanded, but it improved each year. For example it was a better force in 1968 than it had been in 1967. The same criticism has been made of the ROK military during the Korean War. It takes time to produce a good fighting force with solid leadership. The U.S. strategy was always to hand over control to Saigon. The much maligned Westmoreland had that in mind. Westmoreland also developed and kept updated a plan to attack the Ho Chi Minh Trail. And while it's true Johnson - and McNamara - obstructed any such incursions, early in the war McNamara was behind a plan to base the 1st Air Cav in Thailand from where it would interdict the Trail. Westmoreland was opposed to the plan, probably because he believed a three to five division corps was required, and he doubted the logistics available at the time. And strategy didn't change in Vietnam when Abrams succeeded Westmoreland: the real difference was that Tet shattered the Viet Cong.

[@johnnotrealname8168]

Yep. The U.S. kept shooting their feet it is only the stupidity of communism that won them the Cold War.

[@ErichVonCartmann]

Thank you Sir for doing this. My Ancestors thank you. I just bought your book for my Kindle.

[@charliejdk]

Well done! I once lectured at AHEC. Great place, and you fit the excellent standard.

[@RonJohn63]

30:15 This is, why starting in the 1980s, Muslims like OBL and dictators like Saddam Hussein thought that we (the US) were a paper tiger that didn't have the stomach for war. The 1983 retreat after the Beirut Barracks Bombings just reinforced that feeling.

[@fuzzydunlop7928]

....or it could be because the US had been supporting Saddam throughout his war with Iran and he figured he had carte blanche to do as he pleased.

[@ISAFSoldier]

Bin Laden's influence into seeing the US as a paper tiger was when the president at the time pulled US forces out after the failure of Operation Gothic Serpent in Somalia, notably after the Battle of Mogadishu. This would be more in line to how he got his views as many Somali milita had ties to Bin Laden's own fanatic group. Vietnam wasnt a major influence, The US stayed for 9 years in Vietnam, losing almost 60,000 troops, 300,000 wounded, these numbers do not denote a country that runs at the slightest sign of being bloodied.

[@generalissimolam3044]

The South will rise again.

[@Mikelowrey90]

generalissimo lam yes yes we will! The people in Vietnam who go to study abroad, are starting realise how fucked up their country actually is through the lies and deceptions of communism. One day the people will revolt and overthrow the government.

[@USAmerican100]

My Vietnamese wife's father and brother died fighting Communists. Her sister died after Communists took over Saigon.

[@paulconnors2078]

Dr. Wiest: Should you see this comment, I would appreciate your take on Maj. Gen Pham Van Phu of the ARVN and his failure to effectively utilize intell in the Spring of 1975 around Ban Me Thuot. Pham had been a Captain in the 5eme BPVN at Dien Bien Phu and had been captured at the battle's end. He and 4 other senior ARVN generals took their own lives on 30 April 1975 rather than become prisoners of the North Vietnamese.

[@nickvu1873]

+Paul Connors If you want, I can ask him this question directly since I have contact with him. Keep in touch.

[@paulconnors2078]

+Nick Vu Thank you Nick. Dr. Wiest and I have communicated via email.

[@tanletran7270]

General Phu was not an effective Corp Commander . However he was not entirely to blame for the failure of the tactical retreat from the Central Highlands Retreat under fire was not the easiest feat to achieve let alone Highway 7 was blocked by thousands of refugees .The other factor was the poor decision & judgement made by President Thieu & the General Staff . They were made to believe that by withdrawing from the Highland they can preserved their regular forces & defend the Coastal areas & waiting for the American help promised to them in the 1973 Peace Agreement

[@majkoopman]

Truth in most all regards so much untold and certainly hidden from any After Action reports I ever saw…I was an FO (1LT) with my FO team (RTO and SSG both carrying radios with the ARVN during Hamburger). Sadly the above the American LTC’s wanted an pure (???..there were speculations) American Infantry victory no matter what. The ARVN were stopped a number of times entering up the hill but because they had us they had access to our heavy artillery, our helicopter fire and some directed air Napalm attacks which they asked us for to provide in front of their approach wisely killing many NVA in front of them. Never ever saw it mentioned or was credited to them other then they failed as a blocking force to destroy NVA escaping off the hill which I heard said in the rear which wasn’t true. The ARVN who we were with (and sadly we didn’t by unit name even as we were usually dumped by our unit helicopter with various ARVN units where needed in the field already onsite. My respect for these ARVN is great. I saw them fight well and are sadly under appreciated. Our leaders taught them war wrong period. Thank you for this truth. Koop

[@majkoopman]

Roger (Koop) Koopman

[@jamesng6078]

ARVN was the best army. They lost that war because American betrayal them. Sad

[@natewynn344]

@11:56 - he just predicted the Afghanistan event 7 years later

[@BlueMoon-xd2jj]

I accidently run into this clip. A South Vietnamese soldier. The ARVN Colonel who surrendered to the North Vietnamese considering a traitor to us. I would like to correct you a bout the role of the American advisor to South Vietnamese Air Born, Marine, Rangers were just purely providing calling in air support. They did not have anything to do with every day operations of their units. If you need further clarification I can provide you the with the senior South Vietnamese commander still alive here in the US.

[@johnnotrealname8168]

They advised but their attitude was vital. Two U.S. liason Officers in the same battle with the same South-Vietnamese Officers had two opposing conclusions. Culture was important and missed.

[@michaelminhtran41]

Bring More Support for Vietnam against enemy Agents It....

[@michaelminhtran41]

ARVN Needed More Backup by U.S.....

[@KenshinHimura-eb9bv]

Tran Michael and less cowardice from soldiers and better leadership

[@cnghiem67]

Kenshin1998 Himura. Have you educated yourself some more since this comment a year ago, i.e. read some memoirs of US military advisors to Vietnamese military units? The Vietnamese are really one people/culture. Have you ever thought it is quite inconsistent to have one group that is brave and hard fighting while another group is cowardice? Would that make sense to any thinking person?

[@victorquang8669]

I blame the stupid hippies.

[@pkincy]

At the individual level I believe the picture you paint of the SVN soldier is accurate. But their leadership was totally ineffective and incapable. If Trung had still been CG of ARVN 1st Div in LAM SON 719 things may have been slightly better, but to paint an accurate picture of the lack of coordination between Commanders of the key SVN forces in early March of 1971 you need to realize that by that time General Lam could not get his subordinate SVN Marine and Artillery units to follow his orders. It got so bad that we started pulling up the airfield matting at Khe Sanh on March 26th simply because the SVN disarray between their commanders was so bad that it became apparent that Khe Sanh would soon be overrun. As Gnl Sutherland penned in a letter to Gnl Abrams; "...we can take the SVN only far; beyond that point they must go on their own. We have reached that point in LAM SON 719. Today I am not sure of how much further we can take them" From a msg Sutherland (QTR 515) to Abrams, Mar 25, 71. Abrams Papers, CMH.

[@fullfist]

58:40

[@jbrous3602]

Oh, I thought you were talking about the American Soldiers, who sacrificed everything to fight for these people. I keep getting asked what's it like being in a war zone and I keep answering "You'd have to be there", Nice try!

[@johnnotrealname8168]

Over 10% of the South-Vietnamese population was in the military, they fought.

[@rollyson8090]

How about Khmer krom people serve in VN war . No one said anything about them.

[@fuzzydunlop7928]

There's a problem with the narrative here - and otherwise I actually very much enjoy and appreciate this lecture - but he talks about the Tet Offensive (which was really three simultaneous offensives from January through to September), and the Viet Cong were crushed and the NVA defeated, but then he talks about Lam Son, and how the air power inflicted a heavy toll despite the over-all failure of the campaign, then he talks about the Easter Offensive of 1972 and how the NVA were really massacred and crushed - do you see where I'm going with this? In 1975 it's largely conventional warfare and the North Vietnamese are making very aggressive offensive maneuvers. Let's go beyond that war and we have Vietnam fighting with Cambodia and actually INVADING Cambodia while then eventually fighting off a Chinese incursion and largely holding their own. How can the North Vietnamese be crushed over and over and over and over again but still manage to come back fighting? I don't buy the 'we crushed them here, if we just kept fighting we could've licked them!' because it loses its effect when it's used repeatedly in battle after battle - if their ability to fight (let's not forget the war previously with the French) persists or is able to be recouped from the 1950's until the late 1970's then I think there is a reality here that is being overlooked and I think it has to do with inflated statistics, optimistic intelligence, and I think that we have to reconcile this discrepancy. If the 'we crushed them, we just had to keep fighting' narrative is to hold weight, we need to figure out how they could be crushed and reduced time and time again and still keep offering resistance and even eventually staging larger and ever more conventional operations. This is not Soviet Russia with ridiculous industrial and manpower reserves - this is relatively tiny North Vietnam.

[@kvnrthr1589]

As I understand the campaign of 1975, ARVN was badly starved of ammunition, fuel and spare parts while previously in 1972 they had enjoyed plentiful US air support and supplies. Though I'm not sure if PAVN got more supplies than ARVN in this period.

[@miiisohsoup2889]

@@kvnrthr1589 The PAVN received plenty of weapons and supplies by the Chinese and Soviets. It's one of the reasons they managed to get into Saigon.

[@VietLe-USA]

The Cambodian campaign was nothing to the Vietnamese as they could have sleepwalking into Cambodia. As for the Chinese invasion up North, Deng Xi Ping's goal wasn't a regime change in VN but to teach VN a lesson. They came and destroyed the 6 provinces bordered with China. Rumors had it that Deng wanted to show his own generals how outdated the Chinese army was at the time and that China was in need of modernization. He proved his points in the conflict.

[@sulimanthemagnificent4893]

I mean they were destroyed, of the 400,000 or so thousand troops that fought in ‘68 only around 15,000 survived (I’m going off memory so I could be wrong) to fight in 72. I do believe what they had at the time was crushed... however they had plenty of time to rebuild between ‘68 and ‘72 not to mention the fact that after the Paris peace accords they had combat ready troops littered all around South Vietnam in dangerous positions. An army can be trained and built quickly, look at Egypt under Anwar Sadat, within 3-5 years his army went from garbage (in a relative sense) to using high end tech and a modicum of intelligence, and beating Israel (even if only for a short period) is a testament to Egypt’s strength at the time. If Egypt did it and no doubt Vietnam had more backing then Egypt, then surely North Vietnam could bounce back too. (On a more serious note the Paris Peace accords were really the death of south Vietnam, they had hundreds of knives pointed in all the wrong places because of Nixon’s desperation, and the United States unwillingness to ensure South Vietnam’s security made sure those knives went deeper)

[@havu-oj4qh]

When I hear praise from the humiliated losers in Vietnam to the shameless lackeys in South Vietnam, I feel nauseous. Those idiots who disintegrated the 1.2 million-strong army, the "4th strongest in the world" at that time, in 55 days and were still praised as an American "professor", should also reconsider this degree. !It must be added that all American Army and their henchmen in South Vietnam are all fools, as General M.Taylor said.

[@sidneyadnopoz3427]

Ewwww red cringe

[@КолзакМикхаылов]

29:35