http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tet_offensive#Media_lost_the_war_viewpoint
"Media lost the war viewpoint
The Tet Offensive is considered a military defeat for the Communist forces by some. Cited in support of this view is the fact the Offensive did not create an uprising in South Vietnam and the operational cost of the offensive was dangerously high, with the Viet Cong essentially crippled by the huge losses inflicted by South Vietnamese and other Allied forces. The Offensive is widely considered a turning point of the war in Vietnam, with the NLF and NVA winning an enormous psychological and propaganda victory. The Viet Cong's operational forces were effectively crippled by the Offensive. Many Viet Cong who had been operating under cover in the cities of South Vietnam revealed themselves during the Offensive and were killed or captured. The organization was preserved for propaganda purposes, but in practical terms the Viet Cong were finished. Formations that were referred to as Viet Cong were in fact largely filled with North Vietnamese replacements.
According to Colonel Hammes, Tet is sometimes viewed as one of a series of victories won by the United States however the press "turned these victories into a political defeat. The argument is that Tet "should have been a victory in itself and a serious strategic setback for the communist. Further, the continued U.S. and ARVN successes against the Viet Cong and NVA should have sealed our (United States) victory rather than seen the erosion of support. Instead, according to this view, the Communist actually gained strength because of inaccurate reporting by the U.S. and international press. According to this thesis, the inaccurate reporting heavily contributed to the destruction of Americans' will to fight" (Hammes 70).
Cited in support for this view is the well known report by Walter Cronkite, called by some a "Cronkite Moment," the famous Eddie Adams's photograph, as well as editorials in major newspapers. Television reporting is also credited for bringing the horror of war into the living rooms of the United States. It is widely believed that the media portrayal then caused the public to turn against the war. This view is held by many in the military and some political conservatives in the United States. To this day, the Tet Offensive is cited as an example of the important role of the political and psychological aspects of warfare.
"
"Probably the most well-known example of an anti-war statement in the press is Walter Cronkite's special report on the war of February 27, 1968. After returning from a two week tour of Vietnam in which he "met with American and South Vietnamese officials, toured the country and reported from ongoing battles in Hue and other places" (Schmitz p 110) he returned to New York where he directly criticized the military leadership and the Johnson administration: "We have been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest cloud." He concluded by saying that the U.S. was "mired in a stalemate" and called for a negotiated end to the conflict.[25] This was in contrast to his first report in Saigon where he reported that "The Viet Cong suffered a military defeat." (Schmitz p 111)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Cronkite#Vietnam_War
"Vietnam War
Following Cronkite's editorial report during the Tet Offensive that the Vietnam War was unwinnable, President Lyndon Johnson is reported to have said, "If I've lost Walter Cronkite, I've lost Middle America." Contemporaneous NVA documentation shows that Cronkite (a college dropout with no military experience) was entirely mistaken about Tet, but his statements at the time helped lead to Lyndon Johnson's decision to drop out of the 1968 presidential race.
"
It's a common problem the US seems to have.
When they're busy with their blitzkriegs (shock and awe... but Goering would have been proud), the US army is all full of pride, wit and courage.
But as soon as a conflict becomes entrenched, the backbone snaps and the troops just wanna get home for Thanksgiving.
And it's a military blunder the US keeps stumbling into. Yes they have the weapons, yes they have the men, yes they have the logistical supply lines, but when your enemy hates you and you're on their territory, it's next to impossible to actually win (you end up with pocketed resistance at best).
The Tet offensive, even though not very succesful for the NVA or the rebels, was succesful because it rattled the US. The backbone which had been bending because of the various factors I've already mentioned, just bent that little too far.
And it's happening again in Iraq.
One attack which kills more than 50 US soldiers there... and snap.
Just wait and see.
And no amount of reporting is going to make one iota of a difference.
Originally posted by shavixmirActually, Shav, it's not the backbone of the military that snaps. It's the backbone of the average taxpayer.
It's a common problem the US seems to have.
When they're busy with their blitzkriegs (shock and awe... but Goering would have been proud), the US army is all full of pride, wit and courage.
But as soon as a conflict becomes entrenched, the backbone snaps and the troops just wanna get home for Thanksgiving.
And it's a military blunder the US keeps s ...[text shortened]... t wait and see.
And no amount of reporting is going to make one iota of a difference.
Originally posted by shavixmirYou're absolutely right. Americans have no back bone for long drawn out wars. We were of the baby boomer generation who were spoiled and were used to instant gratification. The military lost nothing. The college students revolted against the draft, and the silent majority said nothing. Same thing is happening now, but because there's no draft, we have no demonstrations. The American people had no honor during Vietnam. They confused the warrior with the war. We should reinstate the draft or get out of the war business.
It's a common problem the US seems to have.
When they're busy with their blitzkriegs (shock and awe... but Goering would have been proud), the US army is all full of pride, wit and courage.
But as soon as a conflict becomes entrenched, the backbone snaps and the troops just wanna get home for Thanksgiving.
And it's a military blunder the US keeps s ...[text shortened]... t wait and see.
And no amount of reporting is going to make one iota of a difference.
This is an old chestnut: of course Tet was a suicidal strategy by Hanoi, but that was always part of Ho's plan (dead though he was by then; it lived on in Truong Chinh's blueprint) from the beginning you could just as easily argue that your media saved you another twenty years of futile carnage. The US was never going to hold off the North permanently.
Originally posted by AmauroteThe North's stradegy (Tet) was to get the South to rise up against their gov't. The U.S. discontinued aid to South Vietnam and that is why the were overrun. The American people and Congress fed them to the wolves. America sucks, for that!
This is an old chestnut: of course Tet was a suicidal strategy by Hanoi, but that was always part of Ho's plan (dead though he was by then; it lived on in Truong Chinh's blueprint) from the beginning you could just as easily argue that your media saved you another twenty years of futile carnage. The US was never going to hold off the North permanently.
Originally posted by shavixmirExcellent analysis.
It's a common problem the US seems to have.
When they're busy with their blitzkriegs (shock and awe... but Goering would have been proud), the US army is all full of pride, wit and courage.
But as soon as a conflict becomes entrenched, the backbone snaps and the troops just wanna get home for Thanksgiving.
And it's a military blunder the US keeps s ...[text shortened]... t wait and see.
And no amount of reporting is going to make one iota of a difference.
Originally posted by smw6869The US is not responsible for the national security of some nation at war on the other side of the planet.
The North's stradegy (Tet) was to get the South to rise up against their gov't. The U.S. discontinued aid to South Vietnam and that is why the were overrun. The American people and Congress fed them to the wolves. America sucks, for that!
Originally posted by AThousandYoungwhose backbone is he talking about when he says "When they're busy with their blitzkriegs (shock and awe... but Goering would have been proud), the US army is all full of pride, wit and courage.
Did he say it was the backbone of the military? No he did not.
But as soon as a conflict becomes entrenched, the backbone snaps and the troops just wanna get home for Thanksgiving"?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThen we should not have signed the South East Asia Treaty which said we would do exactly that. We have similar treaties with other nations. I'm with you.Tell them all to pound sand.
The US is not responsible for the national security of some nation at war on the other side of the planet.