24Jun/103
Why do we never hear about the fighting in the Vietnam conflict during the years of ’73 and ’74?
In history, we hear a lot about the USA agreement to withdraw troops in January of '73. We also hear a lot about the defeat of Saigon in '75. Why don't we hear anything about the fighting that took place in between? People say that, once the USA left, the North overcame the South very quickly. However, two and a half years is not quick. Why do we only hear about the fighting in '75?
June 24th, 2010 - 19:00
Because once the US soldiers left, for the most part, so did the US press and television network coverage. Americans were sick of the war and really, mostly did not care what was going on. There was even a little concern if we heard about the fighting, some might actually say we should go back and ‘finish’ the job.
I do remember some WWII era people complaining about during WWII we would never ‘bug out’ and America would never ‘run from a fight’. So there were still a few who were not happy about us pulling out. But most of us just were not interested in the remaining war. Of course when Saigon fell, it was huge news.
June 24th, 2010 - 19:48
2 and a half years is quick. Especially since the war lasted nearly 20 years.
Because no one cared about the fighting once we left. Only the outcome.
We care if our Soldiers are dying over there. Not if they’re dying over there.
June 24th, 2010 - 20:17
Basically, once the US wasn’t involved, the US people didn’t care any more. So the coverage stopped, and from the US point of view what happened after is just a footnote.