Ap Bac

Battle of Ap Bac final draft

In the early times of the Vietnam War there were two main sides, the Viet Cong who were rebels and opposed the South Vietnamese government, and the ARVN (Army of the Republic of Vietnam) which was on the side of the South Vietnamese government. This was one the very first times these two opposing forces had met in battle. On January 2, 1963 the battle of Ap Bac proved to be much more than a normal battle. Many things happened there that were unclear and not resolved. There were many different stories of what happened those days at Ap Bac. This paper will portray what I believed happened at Ap Bac given the evidence at hand.

The two accounts that I read had many holes and missing parts that I found to be not credible. Account two clearly states that ARVN had forces of over three thousand troops mostly from the Seventh Infantry Division, and the Viet Cong with only two hundred forty soldiers with the help of fifty guerrillas. Later on in account two it says that after the battle the ARVN lost sixty one troops with a hundred or more injured, and the Viet Cong only an estimated twelve. Right off the start this seems completely unrealistic. And here is why the ARVN had nearly ten to one odds with exceptionally superior fire power consisting of helicopters, artillery, and armed vehicles and only manage to kill twelve enemy soldiers. Also what I have learned from the past is that the government often does not give an exact number of people that died suggesting that the numbers came from another source which I found to be not credible. In account two it says "ARVN losses were heavy (sixty-one killed and about one hundred wounded." The numbers in account two appear to be much too exact. Account two is very much statistical and everything is based on or around statistics which to me looks unbelievable. The second account is seen as a major loss and the ARVN were unable to overrun the out numbered Viet Cong. It seems to me to be a story that was built up very high and had lots of power like a tale of a heroic infantry, and then shot down and demolished into nothing but talk.

On the contrary account one seems to be much more realistic and truthful. The reason that I believe account one to be more believable is because it has many facts of which I can compare to other things that I have read about Vietnam. Account one says "although the ARVN had a well-conceived plan of attack, they had received