Pop quiz: Defunding and the Vietnam War

[onenote]

Poll question: Pop quiz: Defunding and the Vietnam War

A number of posts have pointed to the Vietnam War as a precedent for Congress forcing the withdrawal of US combat troops by defunding the war effort. So here is a pop quiz on the subject.

Did Congress force the withdrawal of US combat troops by defunding the Vietnam war?

[Tom Joad]

1. The U.S. war continued against the people of Vietnam after most of the troops had

returned home. You know that, right?
The defeat of the South Vietnamese puppet govt., and total withdrawal and end of the bombing, was possible only because Congress kept at work to gradually defund the war.

[sandnsea]

2. Most people just want the troops home

They really don't care what we do about the killing that continues once our troops are out of the picture. It's very libertarian to not give a shit about the plight of others on the planet.

[Tom Joad]

3. I think most of us here want the US to end its long war against the Iraqi people.

[sandnsea]

5. They're fighting each other

So the war isn't going to end just because we leave.

[zulchzulu]

4. It was a combination of Congress and other factors that ended Vietnam War

It was a combination of Congressional legislation (such as the veto-proof Case-Church Amendment in 1973) to cut off funding as well as other factors (like the Paris Peace Accords) and the fall of Saigon in 1975 to the North.

So it was both and the inevitable strength of North Vietnam to overcome the South.

On edit:

There were a few incremental Congressional pieces of legislation that helped turn off the spigot on the Vietnam war:

McGovern-Hatfield Amendment - 1970

Cooper-Church Amendment - 1970

Repeal of Tonkin Gulf Resolution - 1971

Case-Church Amendment - 1973

War Powers Resolution - 1973

[onenote]

6. focusing on getting combat troops home: it was a combination of things, but not defunding

Thanks for pointing this out. We are in agreement.

The point is that I've seen a number of posts that claim that, unlike yesterday, during the Vietnam War Congress stepped up to the plate and passed a defunding bill that forced the withdrawal of US troops from Vietnam. And that simply isn't so.

The McGovern-Hatfield amenment, introduced in September 70, failed by a 55-39 margin.
The Cooper Church Amendment was limited to ending the secret war on Cambodia and did not defund operations in Vietnam. The repeal of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution also had no impact on funding or on troop levels. Rather, it was a reflection of the level of opposition to the war. The Case-Church amendment was a defunding bill, but it wasn't enacted until after US combat troops had been brought home. It did stop,after 60 days, continued air support of the South Vietnamese by the US military. The War Powers resolution also came months after the troops were already home.

One way to look at it is that these various efforts, even if not successful or not directly related to bringing the troops home, had a cumulative impact towards that goal. I think that is right. And I think that the passage of the timeline bill, despite the failure to veto it, and the debate over and divided vote (particularly in the House) on the supplemental bill, and the attachment of some reporting language, however minor, also can be viewed as creating more pressure for the eventual withdrawal of all troops. WOuld I like it sooner rather than later? Of course. But anyone who holds up Vietnam as an example (and I'm not suggesting that you are) of what Democrats should be doing is mistaken about what went on. Indeed, from the time Congress voted on McGovern-Hatfield until the combat troops were withdrawn, around 6000 US troops (and well over 100,000 North and South Vietnamese military and heavens knows how many civilians) died.