Where the Domino Fell: America and Vietnam, 1945 to 1990

by Randy W. Roberts, James S. Olson, Randy Roberts, et al.

Book Overview

Where the Domino Fell recounts the history of American involvement in Vietnam from the end of World War II to the present, clarifying the political aims, military strategy, and social and economic... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0312032633
• ISBN13: 9780312032630
• Release Date: January 1991
• Publisher: St. Martin's Press
• Length: 321 Pages
• Weight: 0.90 lbs.

Customer Reviews

Where the Dominoes Fall, America and Vietnam 1945 to 1990

Book is a well documented history of the USA's involvement in the Vietnam War (and what led up to the war). The authors did an excellent job of detailing the US involvement from the the Colonial period through French Colonization during and after WWII (and separation of N/S VN) and US' total involvement. I particularly was impressed w/Chapter 11 - Distorted Images - Missed Opportunities - which is the first comprehensive study/report of TV, Newspaper & Hollywood's concerted effort to paint the VN Vet, especially combat vets, as psychotic, dangerous, a druggie & potentially very violent who's ready to explode at any movement. (As a VN Combat Vet (1986, '69 & '70 [MACVSOG & 5th SFGA MIKE Force]) it was rewarding to finally see documentation to verify what most of us had thought but were unable to prove. As with any book, there were a few,very few, erroneous facts. For example, Chapter 9 stated it was the marines who called the battle of Ap Bia "Hamburger Hill". In truth it was the valiant troopers of the 101st ABN Div who charged up this muddy shooting gallery 12 separate times before finally capturing it, taking heavy casualties (> 225 KIA) from NVA troops firing from entrenched bunkers and well placed fortified fighting positions. These men recovered of >650 NVA KIA and reported numerous blood trails. Perhaps not important to some, but to me - very important. <br /> <br />The only significant fact omitted by the authors is that the war was actually won by September, 1970. However, it was eventually lost by Washington politicians due to a combination of factors such as: multiple bills,amendments and resolutions condemning the war, attempting to reduce funding and placement of questionable requirements from members of the House and Senate, particularly Democratic Senators McCarthy, Kennedy, Javets and Fulbright. This was compounded by unrealistic "Rules of Engagement" imposed by Washington, including the rule implemented in mid 1970 stipulating Air Force/Navy fighters could not initiate contact with the enemy until fired upon, this was later expanded to include ground combat troops! Later in 1970 Washington strengthened its ridicules rule to stipulate that no US service man could fire upon a "suspected or known" enemy until fired upon "as proven by either a WIA or KIA! Add to this the consistent leaks of classified information, the political impact of the various Anti-War groups on the Majority Party resulting in even more anti-war legislation and redirection of funds available to MACV (in direct conflict w/Gen. Abrams' stated needs). All of this was made even more destructive as a result of the total lack of knowledge and understanding of MACV's strategy and documented success as demonstrated by repeated requisite from the Congress to provide the plan of attack on enemy base areas inside South Vietnam when they had received the original plan and subsequent updates for the past 3 years. Then there was the on-going parade of Washington "d

The Understanding of A Quagmire

Detailing the Vietnamese resistance to foreigners from 40 to 1990 A.D., James S. Olson and Randy Roberts attempt to explain one of the greatest enigmas of war history, the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. It has always been quoted as " the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." This statement is often repeated throughout the story and adequately explains the theme of the book. What the book does is try to prove this statement true by explaining the entire ordeal supported by historical facts. It straightens out the confusion commonly placed with the war and leaves the readers to interpret the meaning for themselves.The content of the novel itself was entertaining and much is to be learned from the book. Its chronological style of narrating the war provided for increasing clarity and understanding for those unfamiliar with this topic, especially with the brief overview of Vietnam's past. The authors skillfully interweaves the present with the past, always explaining the Vietminh's behaviors, actions, or decisions with supporting facts from past history. Also noteworthy was the method of introducing significant people in the war. A short background was always provided so as to make the readers feel they really know these individuals. This method was helpful on clearing up the perplexity of so many names because the authors provided more details on the important ones. Additionally, this book facilitated an understanding of the military aspects of the war, with all the different operations and battle sites. A concise definition was given to each type of military action, followed by an explanation, opposing views, all supported by facts from the past or experience. Not only does this book depend on political explanations, but culture and religion were not to be ignored. This book presented a well-rounded account of the Vietnam with credible supporting statements.Not only does the war have a historical meaning for me but a cultural and family meaning as well. All my childhood, my parents have enjoyed recounting their version of the war every chance they get. The communists were the bad guys and America was the good guy, and that was all there was to it. Their simple grasp of the conflict influenced the way I read the book in the beginning. However, by the time I reached the end, having understood my own meaning of the war, my opinions have changed greatly. The communists were not just ruthless murderers as I have always depicted, but fierce nationalists who wanted the best for their country, which they had believed was reunification and socialism. They suffered greater casualties than Americans or French, yet they held on and endured the pain for a cause they believed was the right path for their country, whom they loved just as much as any South Vietnamese. This quality in them makes them admirable, and the hate associated with their name slowly disinegrates. Moreover, the Americans are not the angelic fighters of evil as they w

Can the Vietnam War Ever Make Sense?

Contemplating this book brings me a curious and unexpected reaction: I feel optimistic and reassured that such a clear history of the Vietnam Wars cannot but help educate future generations against repeating such an impossible adventure as was the US intervention in Vietnam.Previous histories of the war had only left me disgusted and mystified as to how the American rulers could have continuously dug themselves deeper into the quicksand of resisting Vietnamese independence and revolution. For example, George Herring's America's Longest War portrays American involvement not as a product of policy-maker errors or personality quirks, but rather as the logical outgrowth of "containment." Since I was never satisfied with containment's simplistic conception of the breakup of the colonial world, the war always seemed a mysterious product of dark and hidden motives of US policymakers who were ethno-centric, competitive imperial managers incapable of comprehending the commitment to liberation and independence of the Vietnamese people, or of even entertaining the possibility that the USSR was as legitimate as any western nation-state (which were also united by blood and iron) or at least the product of historical forces. William Duiker's Sacred War, documenting the Vietnamese experience of the war, only confirmed my despair over the stupid arrogance of the American ruling class. Ho Chi Minh was so obviously right that only the devil himself could have guided America's hand.Then I read this book, Olson & Roberts' Where the Domino Fell. The authors don't really offer a new perspective on any of the particulars, but they achieve a balance of all actors that make the whole monstrosity at least seem plausible, the stupidity at least understandable. American oversimplifications find their place in the larger constellation of factors, and the war begins to be comprehensible. Vietnamese nationalism is given its proper context of twenty centuries, showing an Asian sage's sense of time and history that the nouveau-riche kid named "USA" couldn't appreciate. The French are shown for the brutal and greedy colonists they were, first accepting huge US subsidies for their war to keep the Indochina colony, and then assuming the "I told you so" attitude once the Americans adopted the war after Dienbienphu. The American war in Vietnam is shown from the perspective of both sides, which really amounts to showing the many sides --from Diem to the Buddhists to the Khmer in Vietnam, from the hawks to the anti-war movement in the USA, the multiple perspectives are concisely explained in all their mutual relations. Whatever judgements the authors place on the merits of these perspectives, they don't allow their own opinions to eclipse the facts, which are made plain to all who will read. Even the American psychological recovery from the war is covered, with an insightful history of Hollywood Vietnam movies linked to the larger political evolution of these United States

Can the Vietnam War Ever Make Sense?

Can the Vietnam War Ever Make Sense?Where the Domino Fell, by James Olson and Randy Roberts, St. Martin's Press, 1991. Contemplating this book brings me a curious and unexpected reaction: I feel optimistic and reassured that such a clear history of the Vietnam Wars cannot but help educate future generations against repeating such an impossible adventure as was the US intervention in Vietnam. Previous histories of the war had only left me disgusted and mystified as to how the American rulers could have continuously dug themselves deeper into the quicksand of resisting Vietnamese independence and revolution. For example, George Herring's America's Longest War portrays American involvement not as a product of policymaker errors or personality quirks, but rather as the logical outgrowth of "containment." Since I was never satisfied with containment's simplistic conception of the breakup of the colonial world, the war always seemed a mysterious product of dar! k and hidden motives of US policymakers who were ethno-centric, competitive imperial managers incapable of comprehending the commitment to liberation and independence of the Vietnamese people, or of even entertaining the possibility that the USSR was a legitimate civilization or at least the product of historical forces. William Duiker's Sacred War, documenting the Vietnamese experience of the war, only confirmed my despair over the stupid arrogance of the American ruling class. Ho Chi Minh was so obviously right that only the devil himself could have guided America's hand. Then I read Olson and Roberts' Where the Domino Fell. The authors don't really offer a new perspective on any of the particulars, but they achieve a balance of all actors that make the whole monstrosity at least seem plausible, the stupidity at least understandable. American oversimplifications find their place in the larger constellation of factors, and the war begins to be comprehensible. Vietnamese ! nationalism is given its proper context of twenty centuries! , showing an Asian sage's sense of time and history that the nouveau-riche kid named America couldn't appreciate. The French are shown for the brutal and greedy colonists they were, first accepting huge US subsidies for their war to keep the Indochina colony, and then assuming the "I told you so" attitude once the Americans adopted the war after Dienbienphu. The American war in Vietnam is shown from the perspective of both sides, which really amounts to showing the many sides --from Diem to the Buddhists to the Khmer in Vietnam, from the hawks to the anti-war movement in the USA, the multiple perspectives are concisely explained in all their mutual relations. Whatever judgements the authors place on the merits of these perspectives, they don't allow their own opinions to eclipse the facts, which are made plain to all who will read. Even the American psychological recovery from the war is covered, with an insightful history of Hollywood Vietnam movies link