Who was the better General (of the US military) during the Vietnam War?

Question

Between General Westmoreland and General Abrams, who was the better general and why? Who's tactics and strategy worked best and most effective and why? (disregarding the factor of American public opinion against the war)

[It just came to my mind after watching a documentary of the Vietnam War. This is not a homework assignment or anything of that nature - just plain out of curiosity. ]

Answer 1

Ho chi Minh all the way, Đi đi mau!

Answer 2

Those of us that served see positives in both.

Where you were, what your job was, when you served, all played into your thoughts.

Answer 3

Abrams..... it's not even close.

Answer 4

Westmoreland was a politician in uniform and did not have either the guts to tell President Johnson to go to h**l and stay out of his business or the integrity to resign.

If the Marine general whose name I can not recall had been given full control instead of Westmoreland, the war would have ended by '68 or sooner.

When Abrams took over, he went back to doing what the Marines had been doing early on.

Unfortunately, by that time Westmoreland's stupidity had poisoned the well so to speak as far as the American people were concerned.

Even though Abrams was once again winning the war, it was too late. By then, the "reporters" were all out for blood and they and the American people would not and could not believe anything the military had to say.

Answer 5

The Marine you are thinking of is Gen Walt. He butted heads with Gen Westmoreland quite often.  

Answer 6

General Abrams (USMC) was a true field commander made general.  He was in the thick of things most of the time, whereas Westmoreland and his entourage of body guards were usually in the rear with the gear.  

Westmoreland was more of a politcian than a commanding general, oh he demanded respect, and on the suface he got it!  Abrahms was a man's man who didn't demand respect but he sure the h**l got it !

Shock and awe;  I stand corrected, General Abrams indeed was US Army, but the rest is true !

Answer 7

Between the two I would go with Abrams and here's why:

(I could on about how we named a tank (M1A1) and a huge building like the one in Frankfurt (V Corps HQ) for the guy, but he was a legend without peer and restarted the Ranger Battalions in 1973 and they were formed in 1974. So even the Army felt this way about him, there isn't nothing I've seen in my 20 years in named after Westmoreland or does anyone from the Vietnam era talk about him with high regard. Abrams and even his son are held on a different plane.)

(I quote this from another source to sum it up for me to)

" His tenure of command was not marked by the public optimism of his predecessors, who were prone to press conferences and public statements. While Westmoreland had for years run the war, using search and destroy tactics, these gave way to the clear and hold strategies that Abrams was so keen to implement. Under his authority, American forces were broken up into small units that would live with and train the South Vietnamese civilians to defend their villages from northern incursion. He also devoted vastly more time than his predecessor had to expanding, training, and equipping the ARVN. His strategy was surprisingly successful and as a result, the South won a colossal victory over the NVA in the Easter Offensive. "

If we would have did this along with taking out all the sanctuaries along the bordering countries, taking the war North and mining the harbor of Haiphong. We have won guerilla wars in the past and he knew this. Too bad he wasn't in charge in 1965.

By the way...he was NOT USMC lol, but US Army from 1936-1974.

Answer 8

Abrams seemed to understand that the Vietnamese needed to be involved and that CAP Marines and other advisory programs were important. Westmoreland seemed to think that Viet Nam was a replay of WWII. So with out question I vote for Abrams.

Answer 9

Without a doubt, Giap - his side won.