Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
...
STAYING THE COURSE
The truth about Vietnam that revisionist historians conveniently forget is that the United States had not lost when we withdrew in 1973. In fact, we grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory two years later when Congress cut off the funding for South Vietnam that had allowed it to continue to fight on its own. Over the four years of Nixon's first term, I had cautiously engineered the withdrawal of the majority of our forces while building up South Vietnam's ability to defend itself. My colleague and friend Henry Kissinger, meanwhile, had negotiated a viable agreement between North and South Vietnam, which was signed in January 1973. It allowed for the United States to withdraw completely its few remaining troops and for the United States and the Soviet Union to continue funding their respective allies in the war at a specified level. Each superpower was permitted to pay for replacement arms and equipment. Documents released from North Vietnamese historical files in recent years have proved that the Soviets violated the treaty from the moment the ink was dry, continuing to send more than $1 billion a year to Hanoi. The United States barely stuck to the allowed amount of military aid for two years, and that was a mere fraction of the Soviet contribution.
Yet during those two years, South Vietnam held its own courageously and respectably against a better-bankrolled enemy. Peace talks continued between the North and the South until the day in 1975 when Congress cut off U.S. funding. The Communists walked out of the talks and never returned. Without U.S. funding, South Vietnam was quickly overrun. We saved a mere $297 million a year and in the process doomed South Vietnam, which had been ably fighting the war without our troops since 1973.
I believed then and still believe today that given enough outside resources, South Vietnam was capable of defending itself, just as I believe Iraq can do the same now. From the Tet offensive in 1968 up to the fall of Saigon in 1975, South Vietnam never lost a major battle. The Tet offensive itself was a victory for South Vietnam and devastated the North Vietnamese army, which lost 289,000 men in 1968 alone. Yet the overriding media portrayal of the Tet offensive and the war thereafter was that of defeat for the United States and the Saigon government. Just so, the overriding media portrayal of the Iraq war is one of failure and futility.
Vietnam gave the United States the reputation for not supporting its allies. The shame of Vietnam is not that we were there in the first place, but that we betrayed our ally in the end. It was Congress that turned its back on the promises of the Paris accord. The president, the secretary of state, and the secretary of defense must share the blame. In the end, they did not stand up for the commitments our nation had made to South Vietnam. Any president or cabinet officer who is turned down by Congress when he asks for funding for a matter of national security or defense simply has not tried hard enough. There is no excuse for that failure. In my four years at the Pentagon, when public support for the Vietnam War was at its nadir, Congress never turned down any requests for the war effort or Defense Department programs. These were tense moments, but I got the votes and the appropriations. A defense secretary's relationship with Congress is second only to his relationship with the men and women in uniform. Both must be able to trust him, and both must know that he respects them. If not, Congress will not fund, and the soldiers, sailors, and air personnel will not follow.
Donald Rumsfeld has been my friend for more than 40 years. Gerald Ford and I went to Evanston to support him in his first congressional race, and I urged President Bush to appoint him secretary of defense. But his overconfident and self-assured style on every issue, while initially endearing him to the media, did not play well with Congress during his first term. My friends in Congress tell me Rumsfeld has modified his style of late, wisely becoming more collegial. Several secretaries during my service on the Appropriations Committee, running all the way from the tenure of Charlie Wilson to that of Clark Clifford, made the mistake of thinking they must appear much smarter than the elected officials to whom they reported. It doesn't always work.
If Rumsfeld wants something from those who are elected to make decisions for the American people, then he must continue to show more deference to Congress. To do otherwise will endanger public support and the funding stream for the Iraq war and its future requirements. A sour relationship on Capitol Hill could doom the whole effort. The importance of this solidarity between Congress and the administration did not escape Saddam Hussein, nor has it escaped the insurgents. In the days leading up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, television stations there showed 1975 footage of U.S. embassy support personnel escaping to helicopters from the roof of the U.S. embassy in Saigon. It was Saddam's message to his people that the United States does not keep its commitments and that we are only as good as the word of our current president. We failed to deliver the logistical support to our allies in South Vietnam during the post-Watergate period because of a breakdown of leadership in Washington. The failure of one administration to keep the promises of another had a devastating effect on the North-South negotiations.
There are no guarantees of continuity in a partisan democracy. We are making commitments as to the future of Iraq on an almost daily basis. These commitments must be understood now so they can be honored later. Every skirmish on the home front that betrays a lack of solidarity on Iraq gives the insurgents more hope and ultimately endangers the men and women we have sent to Iraq to fight in this war for us. We are now committed to a favorable outcome in Iraq, but it must be understood that this will require long-term assistance or our efforts will be in vain....
When Shelly Holcomb of Boiling Springs flew back home from Vietnam in 1971 after serving two years in the Army Nurse Corps, she was told not by to wear her uniform when she got off the plane. U.S. Army veteran Jay Howard of Greenville, who also served in Vietnam for two years, also said he was told not to wear his uniform when he arrived home at Fort Lewis in Washington in 1972. That's because service members were aware that the American public opposed the war and that they would be the subject of protests and ridicule. But Holcomb and Howard said they weren't greeted by protesters, nor did they give much thought to what kind of welcome they'd receive. "We were just glad to get back home," Howard said. On Thursday, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs officially welcomed them and about 30 others at a ceremony at the University of South Carolina Upstate Readiness Center.
Pins were presented by Leanne Weldin, director of the VA's Columbia regional office and an Army veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. "When I returned home from convoy, a Vietnam veteran was there," Weldin said, wiping back tears. "This is to show the kind of welcome he never received." America's direct involvement in Vietnam started in March 1965 as the first Marines landed in Da Nang, followed by the first large-scale battles against the North Vietnamese Army in the la Drang Valley in November of that year. When the final troops were airlifted out in May 1975, the war's death toll included 58,307 Americans. The United States also saw 30,000 injured and tens of thousands disabled. Today there are an estimated 7 million Vietnam-era veterans and 9 million families of veterans. Roughly 7,500 women served in Vietnam, eight of whom were killed and 800 missing in action.
A special 50th anniversary pin ceremony to thank and honor the services of veterans of the Vietnam War was held at the University of South Carolina Upstate Readiness Center on Thursday. Gene Okerlund of Boiling Springs, left, lines up with his fellow veterans and guests during the service.
Thursday, each veteran received a pin commemorating their bravery, courage, integrity, patriotism and sacrifices. The pin included a message on the back, "A Grateful Nation Thanks and Honors You," along with the recipient's name. The ceremony also included a table with an empty chair, signifying the fallen heroes of the war. "Remember, all of you who served with them," said U.S. Army veteran Yolanda Lomax, who works with the VA. "They have not forgotten you." Marine veteran Ronnie Harrison, also a VA employee, said his federal agency is there to serve all veterans. "It is you who have paved the way for all of us," he said. "We will service your claim with conviction, with integrity. We hope when you leave here you will look at the VA as a totally different institution."
Several veterans said they were glad to be recognized, and a bit surprised that the turnout was not larger. "I wish more people could have come," said retired helicopter pilot Charlie Dowling of Glendale, who came to apply for benefits due to possible Agent Orange exposure. He said he served in Vietnam in 1962-63. Nathaniel Cooper of Columbia, who was an Army medic with the 25th Infantry Division, said he thought the recognition Thursday was "very appropriate." The ceremony coincided with a tumultuous week for the VA. President Donald Trump fired embattled Veterans Affairs Secretary David Chulkin and nominated Ronny L. Jackson, an active-duty rear admiral in the Navy, to replace him. Weldin said regardless of who ends up in charge in Washington, her mission in South Carolina remains the same. "We've gotten increasing budgets under the two most recent administrations," she said. "There are 360,000 employees in Veterans Affairs. We have 7,000 in South Carolina. We appreciate the leadership (in Washington), but our employees are here. We continue regardless of who's in leadership. We just keep marching." Weldin said veterans can find out more information about their benefits by visiting VA.gov or Vets.gov, or by calling 800-827-1000.
Vietnam Vets Finally Honored With 'The Welcome They Never Received'
South Vietnam - Wikipedia. With the support of the United States government and the CIA, ARVN officers led by General Dương Văn Minh staged a coup and killed him in 1963. The military held a brief interim military government until General Nguyễn Khánh deposed Minh in a January 1964 coup. Until late 1965, multiple coups and changes of government occurred, with some civilians being allowed to give a semblance of civil rule overseen by a military junta.
