06-03-2016, 08:24 AM
Scott:
I have been studying this whole Vietnam angle for about 20 years.
This includes documents and essays and books.
If you read Newman's masterful book, you will see that what Mansfield's report did was to convince Kennedy that the boost in advisors did not work. Therefore, nothing short of direct American intervention would help, which is what people like Halberstam and Jean Paul Vann wanted. But which Kennedy was not going to do. In fact, Mansfield later said that Kennedy told him in confidence after his report was submitted, that he was going to begin a withdrawal program within the year. (Newman, p. 324)
What you are talking about, the attempt to remove Diem, that was actually traced to the Battle of Ap Bac. Which happened in January of 1963. Military advisor Jean Paul Vann was involved in this, and State Department officers Hilsman and Forrestal were in country when it happened. (Newman, pgs. 302-05) That battle was important since the the ARVN had every single advantage over the Viet Cong. But they still lost, and it was not really close. This convinced Vann that the only way Saigon could win was with American combat troops. It convinced Forrestal and Hilsman that Diem was not the man to win the war. And that was reinforced by the outbreak of the Buddhist crisis in Hue in April of 1963. (ibid, p.332)
Have you read Newman's book?
I have been studying this whole Vietnam angle for about 20 years.
This includes documents and essays and books.
If you read Newman's masterful book, you will see that what Mansfield's report did was to convince Kennedy that the boost in advisors did not work. Therefore, nothing short of direct American intervention would help, which is what people like Halberstam and Jean Paul Vann wanted. But which Kennedy was not going to do. In fact, Mansfield later said that Kennedy told him in confidence after his report was submitted, that he was going to begin a withdrawal program within the year. (Newman, p. 324)
What you are talking about, the attempt to remove Diem, that was actually traced to the Battle of Ap Bac. Which happened in January of 1963. Military advisor Jean Paul Vann was involved in this, and State Department officers Hilsman and Forrestal were in country when it happened. (Newman, pgs. 302-05) That battle was important since the the ARVN had every single advantage over the Viet Cong. But they still lost, and it was not really close. This convinced Vann that the only way Saigon could win was with American combat troops. It convinced Forrestal and Hilsman that Diem was not the man to win the war. And that was reinforced by the outbreak of the Buddhist crisis in Hue in April of 1963. (ibid, p.332)
Have you read Newman's book?