I don't know. I'm skeptical because of Burns' politics. And because I don't think any documentary can fully explain the conflict that focuses on the war as America in Vietnam, as opossed to Vietnam's Civil War that America participated in, which I think is a much more correct framing.

There'a some footage in there of a chopper pilot with an A&M logo painted on the back of his helmet.

A pic was posted back when the doc was released a dozen years ago or so.

Politics aside, it is a good documentary, give it a watch aaalan.

$240 Worth of Pudding said:

---

There'a some footage in there of a chopper pilot with an A&M logo painted on the back of his helmet.

A pic was posted back when the doc was released a dozen years ago or so.

---

A BQ, it had a Treble Clef

Seriously, even the Flintstones had TV

BQ78 said:

---

Politics aside, it is a good documentary, give it a watch aaalan.

---

concur- it was very fair and a nice look at the overall situation over an entire decade

Yep, early government gaslighting and the casualties were always like:

US 75 dead
SVN 225 dead
VC 1,239dead
NVN 730 dead

(I tried to find a picture of Cronkite and the casualty report on the web but could not, strange because it was so ubiquitous back in the 60s and early 70s)

We lost that war due to the press and in less than a minute, Cronkite put a dagger in the heart, at the moment we could have won it militarily, if Johnson was not directing it down to the tactical level:

Tanker123 said:

---

The French learned a lesson at the Battle of in Bin Ph. However, the US did not take heed of the lessons learned at the battle. I am going off of memory here. The Viet Minh amassed an army of 80,000 around the French base. They occupied the high ground and emplaced artillery on the top of the ridgelines and hills. Then they sent wave after wave of infantry to attack the base. It was obvious that they had the will power and resources to be some serious MOFOS.

I am done with TEXAGS. Never met so many caustic people. Admins. You must wear pink panties to be so offended by posts of the Principles Of War. Some of you veterans wear pink panties as well. Getting offended by posting Vietnam Era Music. *******! hahaha

Ban me for good! Adios muchachos! hahaha

---

For the love of God just go then and stop teasing us!

Burns documentary was just more misrepresentations,that is slanted to the antiwar left. The media slant became an exercise in commentary vs reporting. Those who think Burns Doc was ""great or "fair" are wrong. Sadly it will become the "definitive" story of Vietnam...and it is seriously flawed. I am a vietnam vet "66-67 could not finish watching it. It made me angry.

I used to eat breakfast each Wednesday morning with a group of guys that included a bunch of older retired Army officers, all of whom had served in Vietnam. They couldn't stand the documentary either because of its slant and inaccuracies. The officers' retired rank ranged from Major to Major General, so they had witnessed the war from multiple perspectives.

Interestingly, many of them also blamed our loss in Vietnam in part on the way the Army itself managed the war. They take no blame away from LBJ, other politicians, or the press, but they insist that the Army's mismanagement should not be overlooked. Among other things, officers and troops only served in Vietnam for 12 months. In WW 1 and 2 they served until the war was won. On top of that, officers in Vietnam were rotated in their jobs while in country. Officers were only permitted to have combat commands for a mere 6 months. That policy was designed to allow as many officers as possible to have a "combat command" checkmark on their resumes, but also ensured that every officer in a combat command was completely inexperienced. That Army policy was internal; neither the politicians nor the press forced it on the Army.

IIRC Hal Moore was fairly critical of the Army in the book "We Were Soldiers Once and Young." That always surprised me because it is indeed rare to find any flag officer, let alone a high-ranking one, critical of his own service.

That was in Vietnam in HD

Ken Burns' Vietnam series is superb; absolutely brilliant. I am a history teacher, and I watch this series every spring. The music, the stories, the interviews, all of it, just amazing.

I love it so much, and talk about it so often in my class (I'm a history teacher), that my students actually emailed Burns and asked him to write a note to me on a Vietnam War poster. It is one of my prized possessions.

ETA: I am not liberal. I don't agree with Burns' politics, but I think he's a hell of a documentarian.

One of the interviewees for that series was James Wilbanks, former chair of the military history section at Army CGSC (as well as my history instructor) and an Aggie. He was a Vietnam vet and frequent writer on the war. He took off a couple of weeks during our class to go do those interviews.

For the folks who don't like the documentary, or who know vets who say it is inaccurate, can you share what they say some of the inaccuracies are? Genuinely curious.

Being born in 1964,i have many memories of vietnam.

Walter cronkite giving the daily VC body count on the 6 'o'clock news. My mother and I living with 2 of my aunts (her sisters) from 67- 69 because the men including my father were on active duty. So I grew up with 5 cousins who are more like siblings to this day.

At one time, between my father and uncles, 6 were in Vietnam at the same time. Luckily all physically came back… 2 of which mentally did not.

Only one still is alive… the marine F4 RIO, Rooster (call sign) was/is one bad azz dude.