Category Archives: War in Vietnam

Killers

Television Shows, War, War in Vietnam

 

 

Karl Marlantes, was the author of Matterhorn: A Novel of the Vietnam War published in 2010 that was called by Sebastian Junger “one of the most profound and devastating novels ever to come out of Vietnam.” The novel is based on his combat experience in the war. He was a frequent commentator in the television series. He was a significant contributor to the television series The War in Vietnam shown recently on PBS and produced by Ken Burns and Lynn Novice.

After the war he experienced, like to many other soldiers, post traumatic stress disorder. He said, “One of the things I learned in the war is that we are not the top species on the planet because we are nice. People talk a lot about how the military turns kids into killing machines and I will always argue that it is just finishing.

Gwynne Dyer, who was not a commentator in the series, but he had some things to say that I think are relevant and interesting. He pointed out that what sets soldiers apart from other groups of was that they have to be willing to kill. Yet as Dyer said, comparing soldiers to gangs:

 

But it is not a willingness that comes easily to most men—even young men who have been provided with uniform, guns, and official approval to kill those whom their government has designated as enemies. They will, it is true, fall very readily into the stereotypes of the tribal warrior group. Indeed most of them have had at least some glancing acquaintance in their early teens with gangs (more or less violent, depending on, among other things, the neighborhood), the modern relic of that ancient institution.

And in many ways what basic training produces is the uniformed equivalent of a modern street gang: a bunch of tough, confident kids full of bloodthirsty talk But gangs don’t actually kill each other in large numbers. If they behaved the way armies do, you’d need trucks to clean the bodies off the streets every morning. They’re held back by the civilian belief—the normal human belief—that killing another person is an awesome act with huge consequences. [1]

 

So people as a rule have to be taught to kill. They have to be taught to ignore their “normal” instincts not to kill people. Armies expect that when the times come, their soldiers will not hesitate to kill the designated enemy. That is not as simple as it might sound.

Armies actually contain fairly normal ordinary men and women. Such people find it difficult to kill in most circumstances. They have to be persuaded to kill. Armies always assumed their soldiers would kill when they had to.

The Americans decided to check in the Second World War. Were their soldiers actually killing as required? US Army Colonel S. L.A. Marshall actually looked into it and what he found surprised him and many others. He found that in 1943-1945 on average only 15% of trained combat riflemen actually fired their weapons during battle! The rest of the soldiers by and large did not flee or desert. They just did not fire their guns even when their own position was under attack and their own lives and that of their comrades were in danger! This was true whether the action was spread over a day, or a few days. In very aggressive companies the percentage rarely exceeded 25%. Another interesting fact, according to Dyer’s reading of the Marshall’s research, each man (they were mainly men) thought he was the only one not firing. Soldiers did fire if they were with other soldiers because they did not want to be seen holding back, but when alone most did not fire.

There is no similar problem with artillery soldiers or bomber crews. It is thought that this is because they are far enough away that they cannot see their victim. The victim is not real to them. According to Dyer, “they can pretend they are not killing human beings.”[2]

After that, the Americans stepped up their training to get more to kill. As a result it was found in a similar test in the Korean War that 50% of such soldiers fired their weapons. I don’t have the figures for the War in Vietnam. Ye tit is clear indoctrinating soldiers to kill helps “improve” the odds that they will kill.

In the end in the Vietnam War there was plenty of killing. Before the war was over more than 58,000 Americans would be dead, at least 250,000 South Vietnamese troops died, in the conflict as well. So did over a million North Vietnamese soldiers and Vietcong guerillas.”[3] Added to that, 2,000,000 Vietnamese civilians are thought to have died as well as tens of thousands in neighboring states such as Laos and Cambodia. Vietnam actually lost 10% of its population in the war. That is a lot of killing.

[1] Gwynne Dyer, War (1985) p. 116

[2] Gwynne Dyer, War (1985) p. 118

[3] Geoffrey Ward, The Vietnam War (2017) produced by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick, PBS

Fear

Television Shows, War, War in Vietnam,

 

I am not anti-American. I love almost all Americans that I have met. I visited the US for extended visits for 5 or 6 years in a row. But I do not want to hesitate to criticize them when necessary. I know Canadians have problems too. Our impact is just so much less than our neighbours to the south because we are so much smaller.

The US as the richest and most powerful country in the world has to be able to take criticism. I ask no more of them than to uphold their own ideals enshrined in their own public documents and public statements. They constantly claim to be the best country in the world. So understandably we tend to expect they act accordingly.

John Musgrave, an 18-year old American soldier did not know what to expect when he came to Vietnam. As a result he was scared to death of the Vietnamese. As Musgrave said, “I hated them so much I was terrified of them. The scarder I got, the more I hated them. I was so scared I thought I was hanging on to my honor by my fingernails the entire time I was there.”

I found this surprising. Soldiers from the richest most powerful country in the world were scared of the Vietnamese! How could that be? I think this fear is central to America’s role in Vietnam and also in the world. They seem so strong and secure and certain, yet they are filled with wild fears. I think that is why they spend more on their military than the next 9 countries ranked in military expenditures, put together! That is why they have more guns per capita than almost any other country in the world. That is why they want to build walls to keep out the rapists and murderers.

Fear is corrosive. It can destroy the best of motives, the best of intentions, and the best of people. In the case of Americans I have found, as Musgrave hinted, that their own ideals however are often corroded by fear. It is very difficult to be your best when you are scared.

As a result when Americans go to war they have to go in to the fullest. No half measures. They have go in with what Colin Powell later called “overwhelming force.” That was the Powell doctrine in a nutshell. Some have always felt the US failed to do that in Vietnam. They had too many rules about what they could and could not do. For example, General Curtis Lemay was said that the U.S. should have “bombed the North Vietnamese into the stone age.” He denied that he said that, but certainly some did believe that.

I was surprised to learn from this television series that one of the reasons Americans held back from using overwhelming force was fear of what Russia and China would do in response. American political leaders did not want another war like the one they had just finished in Korea. As a result, they got drawn into an even worse war in Vietnam. That’s what fear does. It shreds reason.

John Musgrave proudly became a Marine in 1967 but that experience changed him forever. When interviewed nearly 490 years later for the show, he said he was still scared of the dark and still has a night-light on when he goes to sleep. 50 years later he is still scared.

 

Growing Up with Vietnam

Television Shows, violence, War, War in Vietnam

 

I grew up with the War in Vietnam. Some of that personal history I am not proud of. My only defence is youth and ignorance. Not a strong defence perhaps, but it’s the best I’ve got and as I’ve learned many times–you gotta go home with the girl you brung.

When I was young I was a devoted follower of Ayn Rand. Today I blush at the thought. Again I rely on my only defences–youth and ignorance. As a follower of Ayn Rand I was required to be an enemy of international Communism. It stood for the death of personal freedom and imposition of dreaded socialism.

As a result of these fundamental principles I had a ready answer to anyone who wanted to talk about the war in Vietnam. The US was on a holy mission to eradicate Communism and halt the spread of this vile contagion. I really believed that stuff.

In fact as a young grade 12 student I had an opportunity to enter a public speaking contest. The top prize was $40. That was not chump change in those days. I could use that money to support my bad habits: pool and cigarettes. I learned very few had entered and my chances were good. In fact I won the prize

I picked as my topic, the war in Vietnam. I chose to explain to the masses how Communists were bent on world domination and had to be stopped or they would take over Southeast Asia and from there, the world. I accepted the domino theory.

Eventually I learned better. I would say I got older and smarter. Some might disagree about the latter. Early on in my first year of University I started to learn more about the world and what the Americans had been trying to persuade. My views changed completely. Soon I was opposed to the War in Vietnam and could not understand any more how I could ever have thought otherwise.

My views changed in part because of a book by a new hero–Bertrand Russell. The book was called War Crimes in Vietnam. The issue of the war burned hotly on university campuses around the world in 1967, when I first attended the University of Manitoba. There were numerous educational talks and rallies in support of the war and in opposition. It was the issue for college students of my generation, for a while. I learned a lot and I learned it fast.

Many students supported the Americans in the war for reasons similar to the ones the motivated me. However a growing number of students were beginning to realize that this war made no sense. It was unlikely to be successful, but much more importantly it was morally wrong. The Americans did not belong I Vietnam and we should not support them and in fact we should try to encourage them to give it up.

I joined the opposition to the war early on in my first year. Now I would say, it did not take long for me to come to my senses.

Eventually the Americans abandoned the war, but not before nearly 59,000 Americans had died, and more than a million Vietnamese people. And all those lives were sacrificed for nothing. The deaths were futile. I felt sorry for the men and women who died on both sides of the war. It was a horrible waste. It was a permanent stain on the United States of America.

Years later I read another book this time by Barbara Tuchman called The March of Folly. One of the follies she described so well was the folly of America in Vietnam and how America had betrayed itself there. I agreed wholeheartedly.

Now, in 2017, there is a PBS film limited series produced by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick called The Vietnam War. It is showing each night on PBS as I write this and I have only seen half of it, but I am enthralled. It tells about the war in great depth. More importantly it tells about the war with video, photographs, learned opinions, and most importantly interviews with people involved on both sides of the war–Americans as well as North and South Vietnamese people. It is outstanding television. I strongly recommend it to everyone. To me, it is woken me from my slumber. I intend to comment on aspects of it in this blog.