If Richard Nixon had won the 1960 election would South Vietnam have stood a better chance of remaining Non- Communist?

Mar 2015
1,395
Yorkshire
#1
I have been reading a thread which is currently running on the question of applying WW2 bombing of North Vietnam to achieve a victory of sorts in Vietnam.

By 1968 with Johnson's decision not to seek re-election, it seemed to most non-Americans and me that the War was about to finish within months.

However I am persuaded by the thread that Nixon's tactics seem to have achieved more results (like them or not) with much less direct American involvement than either Kennedy or Johnson.

Nixon came within a hairbreadth of winning in 1960 (and some say actually would have won without involvement of certain Chicago boss). If he had been elected how different would the outcome have been.

By 1970 the game was almost over but in 1960 would Nixon have done a better job - would South Vietnam have stood a better chance of following in the footsteps of Korea?
 
Last edited:
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,703
SoCal
#2
Nixon would have still lost in 1960 even if he would have won Illinois. That said, though, had he won Illinois and one or more other US states with enough electoral votes, then he would have won in 1960.

As for South Vietnam, maybe if the US could have maintained a credible threat of intervention and actually been prepared to back this up, then maybe South Vietnam could have survived longer. Please keep in mind, though, that a large part of the Communist opposition to the South Vietnamese government were the Viet Cong--who were allied with North Vietnam but who nevertheless AFAIK were largely composed of Communist South Vietnamese.
 

Similar History Discussions