Skip to main content

How did the British win the Battle of Britain?

How did the British win the Battle of Britain? It was looking extremely tentative at first. The Luftwaffe was sending wave after wave of bombers that were focused on air fields and radar stations which really wore the British down. The air fields were caught unprepared taking heavy losses with one big issue being the advanced warning systems to allow for the pilots to get into the air to defend against the bombers. It was really tight for a while where the British had a hard time getting planes into the air fast enough and getting them assembled fast enough in order to be able to replace the losses that were taken in the beginning of the battle. Due to the Nazis having near air superiority over Britain it was decided that aircraft production would be splintered into pieces of industry that were scattered across Britian which would serve to lower losses when the factories were targeted. One of the costs of assembling in pieces scattered is that the logistics of moving the pieces so they...

The Viet Cong Strategy Against the United States Military


The Viet Cong Strategy Against the United States Military

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

The Viet Cong had a well developed strategy which the world would see employed in the decades after the Viet Nam war in every major conflict. The Vietnamese had a long standing history of the French occupying Vietnam since the mid 1800s which helped the Vietnamese to get an understanding of guerrilla tactics which would become the key to beating the US in the 1960s.

The Vietnamese honed their skills and developed their strategies and tactics over the decades prior to the Vietnam war against the French, culminating in the French defeat to the Viet Minh’s during the siege of Din Bin Phu.

Din Bin Phu had been surrounded by the Viet Minh and it was attacked perpetually until the French finally surrendered. It was at Din Bin Phu that the Vietnamese had learned how they could take their small scale guerrilla forces and mass them up to perform a large operational group to strike at a superior force, then break the guerrilla units back into their small scale to integrate back into the population or into the regular army.

The Vietnamese perfected a few strategies which would frustrate the US for the entire war. One frustrating tactic was the ability of the Vietminh to quickly adapt and disburse when they were spotted.

The Vietminh’s agility showed that even the quick mobility of the air cavalry could be countered by being nimble and able to pickup and go quickly and silently into the night. This elusiveness had the effect of making the Viet Cong seem like the invisible enemy and it was extremely demoralizing for the US troops.

Second, swarms of soldiers would charge relentlessly at American positions during attacks. Wave after wave of soldiers that utilized the same bonsai type strategy the Japanese had in WWII, would start with a whistle and a full charge from the Vietnamese.

The sheer number of troops that they would throw into the charges had the hope of swarming the US to get as close enough to them so that they couldn’t call in their air support. This strategy was to mitigate the effect of the American air power and artillery — making it so the US would need to call down air strikes on their own position in order to get any support and if they did that then they were raining hell down on their own people.

Third, the Viet Cong blended in with the Southern Vietnamese people and the guerilla fighters pretended to be regular citizens, and often were civilians moonlighting as guerrillas. This covert strategy made it impossible to tell who the enemy was and who the civilians were and it caused a great deal of ongoing stress for the Americans as they were constantly under pressure from small arms fire and sniper fire but never really aware of where it was coming and when.

Fourth, the Vietnamese also got very good at setting brutal booby traps which would take a few soldiers out if someone recklessly kicked a can that was actually a bomb etc. One of the booby trap strategies that the Viet Cong used were to use stakes that were covered in manure as skin piercing weapons. As the trap was set off a spike would hit a target from a tree causing them a seemingly minor wound.

The spike would pierce the skin but, because there was manure on the spear tip it would inject them with manure and it would very quickly cause that American Soldier to go into shock from sepsis.

If that soldier happened to be in the Jungle when that happened then and if they were in the jungle when they got wounded chances are they wouldn’t live. Sepsis killed soldiers very quickly and it was near impossible to get out of the body once it was in there.

Aside from that the Viet Cong also made very good use of underground tunnel systems that were designed for people their size which made the tunnels extremely hard for the US soldiers to go into due to the US soldiers being on average so much larger than the Vietnamese.

The US military would have to bring in special undersized American soldiers to go through the tunnels to try to clear them out. The Vietnamese got very good at booby trapping their tunnels as well so often the Tunnel Rat would find himself in a very compromises state either because of a trip wire, or well placed poisonous bamboo snakes which were extremely deadly and would kill a GI quite fast considering their tiny size.

The tunnels system was part of a larger network of makeshift roads called the Ho Chi Minh trail. The Ho Chi Minh trail was how the North Vietnamese funneled men and supplies into South Vietnam safely. The trail started up around Hanoi and weaved through the Cambodian border which the US was not able to engage the enemy within Cambodia.

The trail made it challenge to cut off Viet Cong supply chains that were bound for the South and the flexibility of the trail made it non-permanent and hard to track where the supplies were going when suddenly a segment of the trail would stop being used in favor of another hidden segment either under ground or a few kilometers to the east. They mastered the art of logistic supply despite not having the technology that the US had.

The Viet Cong would use ambush tactics where they would only engage the US in short quick fire fights that didn’t last long but were designed as ambushes to strike a few casualties and then extricate before the air support came in to decimate them.

The Viet Cong style of fighting was very demoralizing for the US, as they had to be on guard at all times but would still take a few casualties periodically while being unable to inflict damage back to their attackers.

The US troops were perpetually peppered in small arms fire during these small skirmishes. The US had a hard time getting the VC to commit to large scale battles that did not somehow favor the VC. When they did engage in large scale conflict the US only had mixed success. They always got a larger casualty count but failed to route the Vietnamese. In either case, the demoralizing nature of the battle of attrition made it seem like an unwinnable war which soured the troops as they felt like they were sent to hell to fight a war no one understood or wanted.

The VC capitalized on that demoralized soldier mentality which created pressure to send the troops back home . In the end the VC realized that the Americans were a foreigner and that there would only be so long that the American people would tolerate the expensive foreign war which is what they decided to do, was wait them out until the people called for an end to the war.

The Viet Cong’s ‘wait them out’ strategy became perfected over the next few decades as the Middle East adopted the strategies of the Vietnamese and the Afghanistan’s drove the Soviet’s out using the same strategies. The ‘wait them out’ strategy became a cornerstone for undeveloped/undersupplied small scale militaries so that they could fight large technologically superior forces and win.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the Most Dangerous Situation You Ever Willfully Put Yourself Into?

  What is the Most Dangerous Situation You Ever Willfully Put Yourself Into? Photo by  Vincentiu Solomon  on  Unsplash I parachuted in behind enemy lines for what would turn out to be a near suicide mission. As soon as I landed I could see that the enemy was everywhere. I immediately began to look for cover to assess the situation. At first I was greeted by an eerie silence but then suddenly out of the blue I heard this blood curdling battle cry, which I could tell instantly it was the enemy. If these people found me I feared it would mean certain death, little did I know what I had coming in my future. I quickly found myself some cover and slid up tight between this green gawdy plant thing and what I could only assume was a tree or something as it was extremely hard and immovable. I never took the time to analyze it. Instead, I pressed up against it as tight as I could and I depended on the shadows to conceal what the tree and the plant thing had left in the open. O...

Why do you think that the US could lose it’s top position as a world leader?

  Why do you think that the US could lose it’s top position as a world leader? Photo by Kenny Eliason on Unsplash Sadly, some of the things you have been saying are good assessments of the situation and I believe there is credibility there for why the US is on a down spiral. #1) The Russians figured something out quite a while ago and they ran an experiment in the US in 2016 to see if it was true. People go up in arms that it was to mess with the election and yes, it was partly but that wasn’t the point in itself. By getting that hacker team to focus on the US they were able to spread disinformation and sow seeds of discord that had incalculable effects moving forwards. That hacker group a) showed the world that the US was vulnerable b) it showed that democracy has some major weaknesses that can be exploited c) it showed the threat of total free speech and free speech of the press d) it made the American electoral system seem fraudulent, or at very least not a credible and fa...

What are the potential drawbacks of nationalizing an industry?

 What are the potential drawbacks of nationalizing an industry? It depends on what industry and what the purpose of nationalizing it is. The industries that it makes the most sense to nationalize have some criteria in my opinion: They should be static industries that do not change very much or very quickly in terms of the core of it’s business. It should be an industry that is key to public security, public safety, or the public’s interest. It should be something that is mammoth in size so that it doesn’t affect any small businesses by having it nationalized. It should add value by nationalizing it - such as continuity, consistency, stability etc. There should be a pain point that is needing to be addressed that centralizing that industry under the government addresses it. It should be specialized enough that there is not a lot of competition. It wouldn’t be small business or medium businesses getting put out of business - it should be an industry where it would be cost prohibitive...