On Some Counterproductive Aspects of Tactical Force Employment in South Vietnam

Interviews with Vietnamese Prisoners and Civilians

Greg Carter, Marvin Schaffer

ResearchPublished 1967

An analysis of Vietnamese attitudes toward U.S. and GVN air and ground support operations in villages that were either under attack or occupied by the Viet Cong. The data were obtained from 46 RAND interviews with prisoners and defectors and a CBS public opinion survey in which some 1,400 Vietnamese civilians were interviewed. The analysis indicates that the villagers seem to understand the support operations and tend, in the ratio of more than two to one, to blame the Viet Cong rather than the GVN for civilian damage.

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Web Only
  • Year: 1967
  • Pages: 52
  • Document Number: D-16278

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Carter, Greg and Marvin Schaffer, On Some Counterproductive Aspects of Tactical Force Employment in South Vietnam: Interviews with Vietnamese Prisoners and Civilians. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1967. https://www.rand.org/pubs/documents/D16278.html.
BibTeX RIS

This publication is part of the RAND document series. The RAND document was a product of RAND from 1948 to 1970 representing an internal working paper series written as a step in a continuing study within RAND, which could be expanded, modified, or withdrawn at any time.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.