Comparing and contrasting the practices and strategies utilized in the Korean and Vietnam wars

On a more detailed level, during the mid of the conflicts, there were also several similar points. Operations on behalf of the U.S. had similar results, such being the case with “Rolling Thunder” and “search and destroy” tactics during the Vietnam war and the attack on North Korea after having taken the 38th parallel during the Korean War. In the Korean affair, the U.S. attack seemed to have worked by obtaining control over South Korea and then trying to take control over North Korea as well, yet this—as mentioned before—failed since the Chinese overran all of Korea. During the Vietnam conflict, the U.S. also utilized similar tactics as in the Korean war in the sense that both “Rolling Thunder” and the “search and destroy” tactics failed in terms of conserving the peace in Vietnam. “Rolling Thunder” would have (theoretically) effective if it were not interrupted and “search and destroy” tactics would have also been effectual if the western troops would have not left the territories which they obtained after every attack. As Ambassador Maxwell Taylor mentioned in 1964, “The ability of the Viet Cong continuously to rebuild their units was one of the mysteries of this guerrilla war,” referring to the fact that the Vietcong would simply regroup after an American attack and reestablish a military outpost in the sector which was wiped out—since the western forces would simply leave after having attacked. On that same level, the traditional tactics which the North Koreans and the Vietcong utilized were extremely effective against the western forces. Their knowledge of the territory was much more extensive then that of the allies and their guerrilla tactics also weakened the American forces through a series of attacks. The North Koreans attacked in small groups yet gave big results by destroying the South Koreans and the invading western forces. The Vietnamese also utilized guerrilla tactics which were extremely effective such as their constant hit and run operations and their utilization of their enemies’ wastes as weapons (gathering metals and bunt bombs and using them to build bombs and or other traps—Punji traps: hidden holes with spikes at the bottom of the pit).

Even though there are several apparent instances or aspects between both wars, there were also many contrasting points on both wars in terms of strategies and practices such as the fact that the support which each side obtained was significantly different. During the Korean War, the Chinese are the force that practically won the war for the North Koreans by overrunning all Korean territory with “human waves” while in the Vietnamese war the Vietcong did not directly receive man support but instead obtained weapons from the Russians and the Chinese. Even though this was true, the Russians were feeling reluctant into letting the Chinese aid the Vietnamese too much since they feared that the Chinese might attempt to take over Vietnam in the process of aiding it. The way in which the armies attacked was also distinct in each war since in the Korean War even though the attacks were subtle, the enemy was more noticeable, while on the other hand, the Vietnamese were even harder to localize, since they could easily camouflage themselves (everyone’s clothing was similar, there were absolutely no differences). This is why the western troops had to take chances while eliminating civilians which might have been Vietcong. But in terms of policies and tactics on that level, the Vietnamese also differed from the Koreans in the sense that most of the South Vietnamese utilized “strategic hamlet” in order to round up people who might be opposers to the regime. By doing this, any uprisings were stopped and effectively neutralized.

Both the Korean and the Vietnamese wars had several things in common in terms of the practices and strategies used during these conflicts as well as some aspects which were distinct. The two communist foes in the wars developed guerrilla type warfare and utilized it in a very effective matter against their enemy which lead to even more pressure from both sides of the conflict. Both L.B. Johnson and Nixon said “I’m not going to be the first President to lose a war,” showing an example of the extreme opposition which the Americans encountered in the Asian wars.