Why Not Another Tet?

Why Not Another Tet?

Last week our president said that there might be some "similarities" between the recent surges of terrorist violence in Iraq. And the 1968 "Tet Offensive" in Vietnam. Now, in keeping with the media's conventional wisdom. Which says admitting that anything in Iraq is like it was "in Vietnam." Is tantamount to admitting failure. The nimrods that staff our nation's newsrooms wasted no time waxing on about how Bush had finally admitted the foreboding similarities between our current conflict. And the left's favorite war, the one we lost.

But, it got me to thinking. Now, temporarily putting aside the fact that our sociopath, 7th Century enemies in Iraq are probably incapable of launching an offensive as large and sophisticated as Tet. What would be so bad if they did?

After all, contrary to what I, and I'm sure many of you, were taught. The Tet Offensive was an unmitigated disaster for our commie enemies. Tet was a three-phase plan, involving nearly 100,000 troops, designed to hit every major city in South Vietnam. With the intention of fomenting a massive civilian uprising in the South, that would pave the way for a conventional invasion.

Now, all of that worked. With the exception of hitting all their designated targets, fomenting a massive civilian uprising, and launching a conventional invasion. Instead, the combined NVA/VC forces lost nearly 50,000 killed, more than 5,000 captured, plus several thousand more wounded.

As for the South Vietnamese. Not only did they not join the men from the North, they fought them ferociously. The South Vietnamese bore the brunt of the casualties on the Allied side. While, the civilian population, recoiling in horror at the Communist version of "winning hearts and minds." Which included everything from imprisonment, to torture, and mass murder. Decided, that at least for now, they liked Uncle Sam, a whole lot more than Uncle Ho. And politely declined to take part in the North's attempt to "liberate" them.

So, the offensive failed both militarily and politically. Even General Giap, the commander of the Communist forces at the time. Thought the offensive was a loss and a waste. But, as Giap was soon to find out, he was winning a battle somewhere else. The American media was reporting the offensive as a catastrophe for America and her South Vietnamese ally. Much, the same as in Iraq. Living room televisions were flooded with the images of Allied casualties. "Concerned"(read: indignant, self-righteous, and cowardly) news anchors demanded to know how we could have so grossly under-estimated the resourcefulness of our enemy. Or, how our intelligence apparatus could have failed so miserably. Sound familiar?

And then of course there was Walter Cronkite. Complete with helmet and silly moustache. America's anchorman stood amid the ruins of our enemy's humiliating defeat. And declared that America, despite doing "the best they could," had lost the war. The whole episode (which is sacred and revered amongst the left to this day) was as ridiculous as Teddy Roosevelt surmounting San Juan Hill and loudly proclaiming, "We suck!" Or the Marines fighting their way up Mount Suribachi; finally reaching the top, and raising the white flag.

Thanks to Cronkite and those of his ilk, what was a crowning achievement for our military. And should have been a momentum shift in our direction. Instead became a galvanizing moment for our enemy. As the public slowly but surely bought in to the media spin, and started souring on the war. Seeing this, General Giap abandoned any thought of a conditional surrender. And decided to step-up his attacks.

Now, fast-forward to today. Is there any reason, any whatsoever, to believe this would play out any differently today? Our troops would love nothing more than for our cowardly enemy to finally emerge from behind his women and children, for a little mano-e-mano in the desert. And they would no doubt give them the sound drubbing their fathers gave the Vietcong 40 years ago.

What about fomenting a popular uprising? The terrorists have been working on that for over three years. Iraq's no picnic, but there's nothing like a general uprising there. Not with an army approaching 300,000 strong. And as for that conventional invasion? I'll take an Abrams tank over a TOYOTA any day of the week.

Yes, a replay of Tet would work out very badly for our 7th Century opponents. The only hard part would be finding a journalist to tell the right story.

Got a good idea or topic for The Mighty Gwinn Show? Let us hear from you!