Creighton Abrams And The Anti-War Movement

A Better War examines how General Creighton Abrams’ switch from a policy of attrition to a policy of population security won the battles of Vietnam, but the incompetency of many in Congress lost the war. After General William C. Westmoreland failed to make progress in Vietnam, Abrams was promoted to replace Westmoreland. Under Abrams’ leadership, America saw many victories in Vietnam. However, all of the progress made came a little too late. Weak leadership from Westmoreland combined with a growing domestic opposition to the war forced the war to come to a close.

The situation of the Vietnam War when General Abrams took command looked grim. The U.S. military was attempting to pursue a policy of attrition, with the goal being to inflict as many casualties on the enemy as possible rather than trying to secure territory. Abrams’ predecessor, General Westmoreland, had not made much progress in Vietnam with this policy. In fact, Westmoreland and his troops had suffered considerable losses. These losses caused public support for the war to be …show more content…
Abrams believed that the Anti-War Movement gave the enemy leverage, including material for negotiation (page 114). The Anti-War Movement made many people of Congress, mostly the President, politically weak-willed. The enemy was aware of the complications the Anti-War Movement caused back in America, and decided to use this to their advantage. As the Anti-War Movement grew, the American government became less and less aggressive with their tactics. This was even confirmed by a captured enemy document that stated one of the most important successes of the 1969 offensive was that it encouraged the Anti-War Movement (page 135). This in turn heavily influenced how aggressive the U.S. military would be with their efforts. The Anti-War Movement, among other things, even led Nixon to withdraw troops from Vietnam as to pacify the opposition from back home (page