Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Low tech warfare
Message-ID: <12457@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 20 Dec 89 07:03:16 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Computer Services, Australian National University
Lines: 55
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz

From: Geoff Phipps <phipps@solitary>
>Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz)
>has been writing about the differing strategies pursued by US and
>Australian Forces in Vietnam.  I can't claim to be an expert, I wasn't
>there and I have only read a few books on the subject, but I do see
>things a little differently from him.  While I would agree that a hi-tech
>solution to such a war is impossible (unless you have the political
>support for genocide), I don't think the Australian strategy would have
>worked either.  As usual comparisons have been made to the Malayan
>Emergency.  If you look at the two wars I think you will see that the
>strategies available to the Commonwealth in Malaya were simply not
>available to the US in Vietnam.
>For example:

[...]

          A masterly analysis of the basic differences between the 
situations in Malaya and Vietnam.  However while I was holding up Malaya as 
an example of a successful counter-insurgency campaign I was not, as the 
various Commonwealth advisors the Americans imported into Vietnam did not, 
say that it was the "be all and end all" of how to conduct such a campiagn.  
You have though, Geoff hit the nail on the head in saying that basically 
only a political solution was what would have won the situation in Vietnam 
(as it did in Malaya) or in any counter-insurgency campiagn. In addition 
you have recognised the point that I was trying to make that yes, the 
military side is only an adjunct to the political reforms that must be 
made.
          However I have realised that this discussion has started to 
digress from what my original posting was about.  That was a question as to 
whether the US military had learnt any lessons from Vietnam (like the need 
for joint political-military action)?  And if so what where they and were 
they applying them in other places like El Salvador?  From my reading and 
viewing of the nightly TV news the answer was no.  However I could be 
wrong.  Is anyone willing tell me so?  I was attempting to use the 
Australian successes in Vietnam as a comparision of what the US military 
could have learnt, not as an anti-American bludgeon (although sometimes I 
admit that I think they need one. ;-).

_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
                                        |
Brian Ross                              |Snail Mail:- 
"Bill Bracket the self-made man who came|
in a packet"                            |     Brian Ross
----------------------------------------|     Sociology Dept.R.S.S.S.
E-Mail Addresses:- bxr307@coombs.anu.oz |     Australian National University
                                        |     CANBERRA,A.C.T.,2601,
                   bxr307@csc.anu.oz    |     AUSTRALIA
                                        |
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-