That's called discipline, some folks in the military think they are exempt of orders and SOPs.I had five uncles on my dad’s side (and others on my mother’s) that served in WW2. One of them was in the 3rd Army under Patton…. Utah Beach thru Dec 45. He was an NCO, and had nothing good to say about Patton. Well after the war ended (and before Patton was killed, of course), he was demoted one rank because Patton observed him driving his truck without wearing his helmet.
Didn’t make sense to my uncle, but I’m sure Patton patted himself on the back that night.
He may have been a good General for the country but not convinced he was a great leader for his men.
As a Vietnam vet, I can attest to that. The military was never allowed to prosecute the war the way it should have. There is no doubt that we could have won the war. US forces, whether they were Army, Marines, or Navy ever lost an engagement. During the Tet offensive by the North Vietnamese, we literally destroyed the Viet Cong and they never were an organized fighting force after Tet. The war was run completely from the oval office with LBJ running the show.As far as the politicians were concerned we were not supposed to win the war, but rather to maintain the status quo. The reason I say that is we were not allowed to cross the DMZ and hold territory. And as far as the bombing of North Vietnam goes, it was completely controlled by LBJ while sitting at his desk in the oval office.That is so true! He wasn't going to let anyone not follow his orders, didn't matter who! If that same discipline today we might not have had the end of every war we have been involved in since WW2! We let generals in the Pentagon call the shots and not give a hoot about the bloodshed of our soldiers, take my generation, we could have easily won Vietnam a number of times, but at the last minute the bombing and shelling was called off and the troops were left exposed! Seemed like nobody. in country was able to make a decision without pentagon approval!
Let me rephrase my statement. The U.S. military never lost a set piece battle/ engagement. As far as the battle at LZ Albany goes, it is considered part of the overall battle known as the battle of the Ia Drang Valley which lasted from 11/14/65 through 11/18/65. The troopers of the 2/7 cavalry at LZ Albany were caught flat footed on 11/17/65. Although this action was considered a defeat, overall battle in the IA Drang valley was considered a U.S. victory. Unfortunately, the troopers 2/7 Cavalry did not set-up security when the got to LZ Albany and were regrettably beaten by a larger force of NVA.So, let me make sure I've got this right.
Ike sent Gen (ret) Ridgeway to VN to get an assessment of the situation and upon his return said it would take 500,000 troops committed soonest and meanwhile send in the New Jersey battle group and start shelling Haiphong harbor. Ike said no land war in Asia and maintained the level 500 advisors.
- JFK based on the advice from his best and brightest, increased the "advisors" to 15,000 not including aviation support. The escalation starts.
- LBJ introduced troops into theater, never declared a national emergency to enact stop loss so units went into battle at half-strength. Strength peaked at about 540,000 (Ridgeway was pretty correct in his estimate), but again these came in piece meal. The military hierarchy had no synchronized strategy or ops. It is correct that LBJ picked out bombing targets since the generals went into his office and offered his the opportunity to do so. I would have fired the lot of them, especially Westmoreland.
- Nixon gets elected, puts Gen. Creighton Abrams in charge and the Army attacks into Cambodia and conducts one of the most successful large scale offensives in history. Problem was it should have been done in 1965 not 1970. The purpose of the offense was to push back the enemy to give us breathing room to negotiate for peace and start our withdrawal. The war at this point was unsustainable from a political and public opinion standpoint. Every casualty became fodder in the evening news with no progress to show for it.
So, Ike kept us out, JFK started sneaking us in, LBJ and know nothing generals made this a strategic and operational circus. Nixon and Abrams pushed back and gave us breathing room to withdraw. Winning was effectively off the table in 1966. BTW, we did the same thing in Iraq with the surge having initially invaded with an outnumbered force ill suited for a long campaign.
Final point - the "we didn't lose a single engagement" is a myth. Look up LZ Mary Ann and LZ Albany. Both were slaughters.
Read some unfiltered history.................................So, let me make sure I've got this right.
Ike sent Gen (ret) Ridgeway to VN to get an assessment of the situation and upon his return said it would take 500,000 troops committed soonest and meanwhile send in the New Jersey battle group and start shelling Haiphong harbor. Ike said no land war in Asia and maintained the level 500 advisors.
- JFK based on the advice from his best and brightest, increased the "advisors" to 15,000 not including aviation support. The escalation starts.
- LBJ introduced troops into theater, never declared a national emergency to enact stop loss so units went into battle at half-strength. Strength peaked at about 540,000 (Ridgeway was pretty correct in his estimate), but again these came in piece meal. The military hierarchy had no synchronized strategy or ops. It is correct that LBJ picked out bombing targets since the generals went into his office and offered his the opportunity to do so. I would have fired the lot of them, especially Westmoreland.
- Nixon gets elected, puts Gen. Creighton Abrams in charge and the Army attacks into Cambodia and conducts one of the most successful large scale offensives in history. Problem was it should have been done in 1965 not 1970. The purpose of the offense was to push back the enemy to give us breathing room to negotiate for peace and start our withdrawal. The war at this point was unsustainable from a political and public opinion standpoint. Every casualty became fodder in the evening news with no progress to show for it.
So, Ike kept us out, JFK started sneaking us in, LBJ and know nothing generals made this a strategic and operational circus. Nixon and Abrams pushed back and gave us breathing room to withdraw. Winning was effectively off the table in 1966. BTW, we did the same thing in Iraq with the surge having initially invaded with an outnumbered force ill suited for a long campaign.
Final point - the "we didn't lose a single engagement" is a myth. Look up LZ Mary Ann and LZ Albany. Both were slaughters.
I wholeheartedly agree. Remember that FDR & the OSS (CIA) installed Mao and the communists in China.If I remember correctly when I did a paper in school, some of the material I found said that Mr. Scott did a lot of background work before he did the movie to learn about the man. Mr. Scott had indicated that he felt that the U.S. government and the Soviets worked together covertly to get rid of Patton, because of his beliefs about Stalin and Russia in general. Which is why he wanted our boys to push on through to Moscow and all the way to the sea. Could have been an interesting world right now had that happened.