Vietnam....
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2024, 07:06:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History
  Alternative History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Vietnam....
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Vietnam....  (Read 693 times)
MillennialModerate
MillennialMAModerate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,016
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 01, 2017, 04:17:03 AM »

JFK survives and is re-elected. Does he back out or go all in like LBJ?

Same question but if Goldwater beats LBJ in ‘64.
Logged
SingingAnalyst
mathstatman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2017, 12:27:28 PM »

Excellent question. I think in either case (Kennedy or Goldwater) we would not have gotten into the quagmire we did. I have read that the evidence for the 1964 attack leading up to the Tonkin Gulf Resolution was, pardon the expression, trumped up.

Then again, I have also heard France (de Gaulle in particular) had a role in US involvement. So I don't know.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,888
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2017, 05:51:37 AM »

I think Goldwater would also have gotten into a massive ground war.

Not sure about JFK. I think he may have handled the situation much better, though his policies were contradictory: He dramatically increased US involvement in Vietnam, then wanted to get some military advisers out shortly before his death. Meanwhile, he said, he would not allow the communists take over the South. One thing should be pointed out: LBJ listened to the same people than JFK (largely). It was their recommendation to get in, though the Johnson Administration, in 1964 and 1965, never planned to get in 500,000 troops. That was a result of a step-by-step escalation. Westmoreland and others frequently told the president "just one more troop increase, one more escalation and we have won that thing" (though there never was a clear definition what "victory" would actually mean).

Unfortunately, that remains the same interesting question than whether FDR would have gotten us in the Cold War as well.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2017, 03:26:08 PM »

I think Goldwater would order an immediate escalation of ~150,000 troops, then use this escalation to negotiate a Korea-like situation. I imagine he would pledge 25,000 more troops for every week they refused to agree to the status quo borders, and an additional fifty miles forwards every week on the border. If they are stupid enough not to agree to peace, I think that, after 6-8 months, the million American troops pledged to fight against them would either force them to negotiate or easily defeat the Viet Cong.

A sudden, strong strike is much preferable to the quagmire Vietnam was in our timeline.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 13 queries.