The Viet Cong were destroyed in the Tet Offensive. Thereafter they were never a factor in the war. The media made it sound like they won. Imagine the media doing the same with the Battle of the Bulge.
The American's only won a single battle against the British over the course of the entire revolution, they won by making the goals of the British state untenable. In a similar way to how the Vietnamese won by leveraging their greater commitment and tactical ability.
It's also why the confederacy almost beat the north in the civil war and proceeded to win the reconstruction despite their numerical and industrial inferiority they had much more heart for the fight and therefore willingness to accept losses
Damn, wild people will upvote just blatantly wrong information.
Americans won far, far more than a single battle during the American Revolution, lmfao.
Here, I will name two off the top of my head: Battle of Trenton and Ticonderoga. Among many, many more. Actually giving me a conniption over here as a history buff.
After the defeat of the Viet Cong in the Tet Offensive, the remaining opposition to imperialism was the North Vietnamese Army, or NVA.
It is surmised that the NVA didn't like the competition and encouraged the VC to rise up so that the Americans would crush them. Whether that happened or not, the effect was the same: the VC were not a factor for the rest of the war.
Sadly holds up the fiction of US military superiority.
I understand that you want to say that the massive reinforcements of US troops and wide areas shortly controlled by the Viet Cong couldn't be held, combined with the losses in people and organizational capacity (by increased air bombardments and long supply lines) meant that the Tet couldn't stop the assault in short time - as (freely quoted from Viet Cong leadership) 'no offensive operations seem possible till replenishing of the troops' (which was supposed to take up to four years).
However it wasn't that the Viet Cong would've been defeated after the operation.
Furthermore I agree with you that the media impact in the US was important for the medial "homefront", though lets not act as if the anti-war movement was really as important as sometimes claimed. Nixon did shift from infantry and such to air bombings and forced intensification of South Vietnamese drafting so that more "South Vietnamese"-forces would be killed in operations. This is a very different logic in my opinion from "the media made it impossible to stay in Vietnam" - it was quite possible (would've been a bad move, but was possible non the less).
Nah, it's not what I want to say. What I want to say is that the VC ceased to be a factor in the war after they were all but destroyed in the Tet Offensive. Thereafter it was the NVA that did the fighting. Moreover the NVA may well have encouraged the VC to stand and fight and thus be eliminated.
The media did mislead the American people just like they did decades later in the run-up to the war in Iraq.
That was not the media's fault, the military had been giving official statements that American troops were winning and the resistance posed no real threat. Then the Tet Offensive happened which, yes destroyed the VC, but also totally blew a hole in the military's official story: if the resistance posed no threat, how could they launch a massive nationwide offensive? Tet just exposed the already dire situation
The Viet Cong were destroyed in the Tet Offensive. Thereafter they were never a factor in the war. The media made it sound like they won. Imagine the media doing the same with the Battle of the Bulge.
The US was nowhere near defeating the Vietnamese. At most, they managed to deplete local partisan forces.
This was no "Battle of the Bulge" lmao. Empire brains will always minimize away failures
The American's only won a single battle against the British over the course of the entire revolution, they won by making the goals of the British state untenable. In a similar way to how the Vietnamese won by leveraging their greater commitment and tactical ability.
It's also why the confederacy almost beat the north in the civil war and proceeded to win the reconstruction despite their numerical and industrial inferiority they had much more heart for the fight and therefore willingness to accept losses
Damn, wild people will upvote just blatantly wrong information.
Americans won far, far more than a single battle during the American Revolution, lmfao.
Here, I will name two off the top of my head: Battle of Trenton and Ticonderoga. Among many, many more. Actually giving me a conniption over here as a history buff.
After the defeat of the Viet Cong in the Tet Offensive, the remaining opposition to imperialism was the North Vietnamese Army, or NVA.
It is surmised that the NVA didn't like the competition and encouraged the VC to rise up so that the Americans would crush them. Whether that happened or not, the effect was the same: the VC were not a factor for the rest of the war.
This is not quite accurate and:
Sadly holds up the fiction of US military superiority.
I understand that you want to say that the massive reinforcements of US troops and wide areas shortly controlled by the Viet Cong couldn't be held, combined with the losses in people and organizational capacity (by increased air bombardments and long supply lines) meant that the Tet couldn't stop the assault in short time - as (freely quoted from Viet Cong leadership) 'no offensive operations seem possible till replenishing of the troops' (which was supposed to take up to four years).
However it wasn't that the Viet Cong would've been defeated after the operation.
Furthermore I agree with you that the media impact in the US was important for the medial "homefront", though lets not act as if the anti-war movement was really as important as sometimes claimed. Nixon did shift from infantry and such to air bombings and forced intensification of South Vietnamese drafting so that more "South Vietnamese"-forces would be killed in operations. This is a very different logic in my opinion from "the media made it impossible to stay in Vietnam" - it was quite possible (would've been a bad move, but was possible non the less).
Nah, it's not what I want to say. What I want to say is that the VC ceased to be a factor in the war after they were all but destroyed in the Tet Offensive. Thereafter it was the NVA that did the fighting. Moreover the NVA may well have encouraged the VC to stand and fight and thus be eliminated.
The media did mislead the American people just like they did decades later in the run-up to the war in Iraq.
That was not the media's fault, the military had been giving official statements that American troops were winning and the resistance posed no real threat. Then the Tet Offensive happened which, yes destroyed the VC, but also totally blew a hole in the military's official story: if the resistance posed no threat, how could they launch a massive nationwide offensive? Tet just exposed the already dire situation
The media reported it as a VC win and US loss. It was not.