| Digital List Price: | $26.95 |
| Kindle Price: | $14.55 Save $12.40 (46%) |
| Sold by: | Amazon.com Services LLC |
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
Lost Battalion of Tet: The Breakout of 2/12th Cavalry at Hue (Association of the United States Army) Revised Edition, Kindle Edition
- ISBN-13978-1591144342
- EditionRevised
- PublisherNaval Institute Press
- Publication dateMay 11, 2013
- LanguageEnglish
- File size4471 KB
Kindle E-Readers
- Kindle Paperwhite
- Kindle Paperwhite (5th Generation)
- Kindle Touch
- Kindle Voyage
- Kindle
- Kindle Oasis
- All new Kindle paperwhite
- All New Kindle E-reader
- Kindle Oasis (9th Generation)
- Kindle Paperwhite (10th Generation)
- Kindle Paperwhite (11th Generation)
- All New Kindle E-reader (11th Generation)
- Kindle Scribe (1st Generation)
- Kindle (10th Generation)
- Kindle Oasis (10th Generation)
Fire Tablets
Free Kindle Reading Apps
Customers who bought this item also bought
Editorial Reviews
Review
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Chapter 1
AMERICA'S BEST
We saw the chopper approach.
The bastard rocketed us instead of the enemy positions. One soldier died instantly, and four more were wounded. The enemy, in a treeline two hundred yards in front of us, were unscathed.
When the ARVN gunners, after shooting two rounds, refused our next request to fire because the hamlet in front of us was considered friendly, Lieutenant Colonel Sweet, our battalion commander, called Colonel Campbell, the brigade commander, to explain our dilemma. Campbell said he was under pressure from division to keep us moving and ordered us to continue the attack toward Hue. It was a legal order, so there was no point in arguing.
Every man present intuitively realized he was like a sailor ordered to stay at his station on a sinking ship with no lifeboats. We were going to have to attack across an open field into foxholes and bunkers prepared solely for the purpose of discouraging anyone from getting closer. There would be no artillery support, air strikes, or helicopter rocket runs to soften the NVA positions, no smoke to conceal our attack. There was no possibility of pulling back and selecting another route, or even attacking indirectly from a flank using firepower and maneuver. No, this was going to be a frontal assault where every man would be exposed to lethal fire from the instant he got up until the dug-in enemy facing us either withdrew or was killed.
The difference in size between the 2/12th Cavalry Battalion in 1968 and the Light Brigade in 1856 was slight: our four hundred compared to their six hundred. It's true they charged for about one and a half miles with cannons on the front, right, and left, and we only had to advance two hundred yards or so, but both we and the Light Brigade offered human-wave targets that put the defenders at little risk.
It was quiet when we began to move across the otherwise nondescript field.
The ground had been cultivated at one time, so there was no place to hide. There weren't even shell craters. From behind our trees we looked out over the mud to see the enemy reinforcing their positions, ready to receive us shoulder-to-shoulder. It was the first time I used the new binoculars purchased on a recent R&R in Tokyo.
I had the feeling it was going to be my last.
This incident on February 3, 1968, just outside Hue was something that should have never taken place. There was no satisfactory or compelling reason for a U.S. infantry battalion to assault a fortified North Vietnamese Army force two hundred yards away over an open field with no artillery or air support. The defenders had every advantage. The only support available was a helicopter gunship that mistakenly attacked the U.S. forces instead of the NVA. A steady drizzle and heavy, low clouds meant further support from the air was unlikely for the foreseeable future. As the Americans started moving across the field just before noon, every man was a target. The Americans fired their rifles furiously as they rushed to the other side, but the NVA defenders were barely scathed. The NVA commander -- cool and firmly in control -- allowed the U.S. battalion to reach the treeline and one hundred yards beyond, withdrawing his forces slightly so the Americans could gain a foothold. His blocking forces were under orders to let the Americans in, so they would be encouraged to continue toward Hue, believing the withdrawing NVA had been defeated.
In fact, the NVA commander set a trap. As Americans labored hard to establish a hasty perimeter and consolidate their force before moving on, the NVA closed in behind the battalion with a three-to-one combat advantage in manpower and firepower. In one horrible instant, Lieutenant Colonel Sweet, the U.S. commander, realized that he was surrounded and confronted by two devastating realities: he could neither move nor maneuver his forces, and any notion of reinforcement or resupply was out of the question. No field manuals, training, or previous experience prepared him for what was to become an ultimate test of human endurance.
Nine hours after first making contact with the enemy, U.S. artillery units arrived and began firing to support the solidly surrounded infantry battalion. Ammunition available to the artillery was barely sufficient to ensure the outnumbered force was not instantly overrun, but as time passed and casualties mounted, annihilation was never ruled out by the youthful battalion commander, especially as he saw the perimeter shrink to ever-smaller circles. The size was a function of riflemen available to mount a defense. One of the battalion's four companies, normally 171 men, was down to 40.
During the next afternoon, the entrapped men saw that their fate was ordained: death or captivity. Help from higher headquarters was neither offered nor available in the time remaining. Artillery support became increasingly dangerous as the distance between attackers and defenders inexorably closed. Exhaustion, no food at all, and very little ammunition added to the despair.
The battalion commander, Dick Sweet, realizing now he was on his own to make whatever decision would save the most soldiers, pulled in his company commanders to give them a say in the options. After every commander spoke his mind, Sweet made the decision to make a run for it that night where encircling forces seemed to be the weakest. It was a gamble with high stakes. If the maneuver failed to take the enemy by surprise, the fight was over.
The dead and equipment were left behind to give those escaping every chance to succeed. Ruses were contrived to fool the NVA for a few needed minutes as the battalion started to move in single file toward a hilltop to the west. Failure meant every man for himself, an unspoken but understood reality. For the time being, the wounded would stay with the column. But they, too, faced an uncertain future.
That night, whatever force looks after infantrymen was with the remnants of the 2d Battalion, 12th Cavalry. The tattered, limping column made it to a mountaintop where the NVA could not follow. Although they didn't know it until much later, the Americans had stumbled into the headquarters of the NVA forces attacking and holding Hue. When the battalion set out toward Hue on February 3, it was supposed to take only a day to reach the city walls. It took nearly a month.
During the Vietnam War, U.S. soldiers were provided more and better support than any previous fighting force in our nation's history. Supply systems pumped in countless tons of war matériel of every description, and a well-greased distribution network ensured there was always enough firepower on hand to support the commander's scheme of maneuver, regardless of what it took. So plentiful was the support that soldiers and commanders too, with just cause, came to take it for granted. Despite occasional lapses, there was always more than enough to feed the war machine as many beans and bullets as it could digest.
Artillery pieces could be blown up, helicopters shot down, and trucks destroyed, but there was always enough matériel in the pipeline to provide a replacement in a matter of days, if not hours. Ammunition dumps occasionally took a direct hit and filled the sky with incredible pyrotechnics, but the system was so robust that men fighting the ground war were rarely affected. A world-class supermarket chain couldn't do any better.
But when the system went haywire, it went truly and disastrously sour, triggering first surprise, then shock. On even rarer occasions, commanders who had the power to move battalions and brigades from one place to another momentarily forgot about the rupture in the pipeline and issued movement orders as if nothing had happened. The first order, such as sending us toward Hue, may have been innocuous enough, seemingly insignificant at the time. Yet the results after all events were played out were disastrous. Not merely sad or unfortunate, but tragic.
I use the word "tragic" advisedly, because ill-advised attack orders can trigger a chain of events that once started cannot be stopped. For many unfortunate soldiers at the end of the chain the result was death, often senseless death. That no single person could be held responsible adds to the tragic dimension.
In the case of Vietnam, all lives were lost in vain, but some more than others. If tragedy can be measured one life at a time, the story is indeed worth recording.
This tragic tale began on February 1, 1968 -- the beginning of the Tet holiday -- when Major General John J. Tolson III, commander of the 1st Air Cavalry Division, was directed by higher command to send an infantry battalion toward Hue to help take pressure off besieged U.S. Marines trapped in the city who were holding on by the skin of their teeth.
Tolson alerted the commander of his 3d Brigade, Colonel Hubert S. (Bill) Campbell, who in turn called one of his battalion commanders, Lieutenant Colonel Richard S. Sweet, commanding the 2d Battalion, 12th Cavalry, or 2/12th Cav. Campbell read Sweet the order from a small sheet of Tolson's personal notepaper in the general's own handwriting. Mission
(1) Seal off city on west & north with right flank based on Song Huong River.
(2) Destroy enemy forces attempting to either reinforce or escape from Hue Citadel.
Twenty-five years later Campbell still had this message among his personal papers saved from the war, folded in quarters so he could stick it in his pocket.
Until we received our order to move toward Hue, things were pretty quiet at Camp Evans, the new headquarters of the 1st Air Cavalry Division about fifteen miles north of Hue near Highway 1. Camp Evans was the new temporary station of the 3d Brigade. Just the day before, Campbell recorded in his diary several administrative matters, including the importance of "each day each man filling five sandbags." The Tet truce was just about to begin, so it was hardly surprising that everyone acted as if the war would slow down for a fe...
Product details
- ASIN : B00CGNRVEC
- Publisher : Naval Institute Press; Revised edition (May 11, 2013)
- Publication date : May 11, 2013
- Language : English
- File size : 4471 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Not Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Print length : 285 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #919,847 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #690 in Vietnam War History (Kindle Store)
- #2,399 in Vietnam War History (Books)
- #2,572 in Military History of the United States
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Charles Krohn was born in Saginaw, Michigan in 1937, the youngest of four sons, all who served in the US Army. After graduating from the University of Michigan in 1959 he attended Stanford Law School, but only for three semesters. Realizing he had little interest in law as a profession, he performed his ROTC-obligated 2-year commitment in South Korea and Oakland Army Terminal. He then worked for several newspapers in Michigan, including The Flint Journal. As the war in Vietnam escalated, Krohn aspired to be a military writer and went to work for UPI in Chicago, hoping for an assignment in UPI's Saigon bureau. That didn't seem likely so he accepted the Army's invitation to return to active duty as the public affairs officer of the 1st Air Cavalry Division. His experience as the intelligence officer provided the basis for his book, The Lost Battalion of Tet. Afterword he had assignments in Germany, Fort Stewart, GA, the Pentagon and Fort Monroe, VA. He had a second assignment in Vietnam as an advisor, 1970-71. He ended his career, first in the Pentagon as the Army's deputy chief of public affairs, briefly as a public affairs officer in Iraq, then as a visiting professor of journalism at the University of Michigan, and finally as a public affairs advisor to the Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission in Arlington, VA. He may be reached at clex@msn.com
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonCustomers say
Customers find the book excellent and well-written. Opinions are mixed on the narrative quality, realism, and candor. Some find the story amazing, while others say it's poorly planned and executed.
AI-generated from the text of customer reviews
Customers find the book excellent, well-written, and honest. They also say it's exciting, tragic, and well-researched.
"...Michael Shaara’s “The Killer Angels” was an enjoyable read, but it, too, seemed to me like a play—in this case, one in which larger-than-life union..." Read more
"...That adventure alone would make "The Lost Battalion of Tet" worth reading for any soldier, but every trooper could also benefit from meditating Krohn..." Read more
"The "Lost Battalion of Tet" is a well-written account of one unit's actions during the Tet Offensive of 1968...." Read more
"...Good book and well written, Charlie did a good job." Read more
Customers have mixed opinions about the narrative quality of the book. Some mention it's amazing and a timeless tale of infantry soldiers in contact. However, others say the cavalry was poorly planned and executed.
"...The result is a book that succeeds on many levels. It succeeds first at the level of story, as a timeless tale of infantry soldiers in contact..." Read more
"...The move north by the 1st Cav was poorly planned and very poorly executed -- at one point the 2/12 was ordered not to take ammunition with it on..." Read more
"...This work is valuable, not only for its amazing story, but because it provides a perspective from both the staff and individual combat level...." Read more
"Amazing story...." Read more
Customers have mixed opinions about the realism of the book. Some mention it conveys candor, realism, and a sense of immediacy to today's U.S. military. They say it adds layers to the context of the battle and provides a perspective from both the staff and individual. However, others say the analysis is not always dispassionate, making it slightly suspect. They also mention the book spends too much time making excuses and justifying actions of officers.
"...This revision tells a true story that is not just harrowing, but it accomplishes that most difficult of things for a military history to achieve: it..." Read more
"...a High School term paper, confusing, not enough detail and lots of unnecessary filler, because the event doesn't seem to warrant a book, maybe a..." Read more
"...is valuable, not only for its amazing story, but because it provides a perspective from both the staff and individual combat level...." Read more
"Very disappointed with the book. Spent too much time making excuses and justifying actions of officers." Read more
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
The esteem with which Elbert Hubbert’s “A Message to Garcia” was held I found even more baffling. This essay did not seem to rise even to the level of overly simplistic morality play. It is a diatribe, a rant, in which the quality of unquestioning loyalty is exalted above all other qualities, in which the willingness to, yes, jump off that cliff if so ordered is extolled. Hubbert, it seemed, would have made a great Nazi.
Ernest Dunlop Swinton’s “The Defense of Duffer’s Drift” taught me something about small-unit tactics on an infantry-pure battlefield, very little of value outside that laser focus. Michael Shaara’s “The Killer Angels” was an enjoyable read, but it, too, seemed to me like a play—in this case, one in which larger-than-life union and confederate generals say larger-than-life things and in which all the real muck and horror of war take place somewhere off-stage.
I could go on in this vein, but it is best I move to the heart of the matter: as a profession, the U.S. Army is in desperate need of better written and more useful “classics.” Recently, I came across one little-known book that could help fill this need. Charles Krohn’s “The Lost Battalion of TET: Breakout of the 2/12 Cavalry at Hue” was first published by Praeger in 1993. In honor of the TET offensive’s 40th anniversary, the Naval Institute Press published a substantial revision in 2008—a version that was just recently released on Kindle. This revision tells a true story that is not just harrowing, but it accomplishes that most difficult of things for a military history to achieve: it usefully instructs without moralizing.
During the Tet Offensive of early 1968, the 2/12 Cavalry battalion of the 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, suffered a 65 percent casualty rate, including 81 KIA and more than 250 wounded in action. As we learn in Krohn’s book, the outcome easily could have been much worse. The battalion could have been annihilated. In fact, the battalion SHOULD have been annihilated.
Although lacking artillery support and, thanks to the weather, close air support, the battalion was ordered to attack an entrenched North Vietnamese Army (NVA) regiment across 200 yards of open field. This mission was, as Krohn describes, as futile and foolhardy as the famous Charge of the Light Brigade. The battalion, of course, was decimated. Then, the NVA regiment cagily drew the battalion in so as to completely surround it with superior numbers. Lacking any hope of reinforcements or supporting fires, only a desperate night exfiltration through a tiny gap in the enemy’s lines no wider than 75 yards allowed a majority of this battalion’s soldiers to escape enemy contact, reach higher ground, and survive.
When reading of their escape, I found myself holding my breath, hardly believing that these 300+ men were going to make it. Surely, I thought, just one American soldier is going to fall in the darkness, groan in pain, sneeze, cough, step on a dry branch—do something, to alert the enemy just yards away of their presence. But, miracle of miracles, they made it.
Thoroughly researched and well-written, Krohn’s account of this battle comes from the personal papers of the unit’s officers, captured enemy documents, and scores of interviews with survivors. Adding to his account’s authenticity is the fact that Krohn was there, a young captain serving as the battalion’s intelligence officer. This experience not only adds to the account’s authenticity, but it adds layers to the context of the battle, namely, the book’s descriptions of the NVA’s actions and his battalion’s actions relative to their enemy.
The result is a book that succeeds on many levels. It succeeds first at the level of story, as a timeless tale of infantry soldiers in contact with a superior enemy and of the many characters—often eccentric, all brought vividly to life—who fight courageously and desperately to avert total catastrophe.
It succeeds also as the best extant after-action review of this tactical defeat—the kind of defeat, as American military mythology would have it, the U.S. Army never suffered during the Vietnam War. How was it possible that a battalion of American soldiers could be ordered to attack a superior enemy across open terrain, and, once on their objective, find themselves surrounded and facing near-certain annihilation with no hope of rescue? Krohn does an excellent job of analyzing the many factors that led to the battalion’s desperate situation, from the havoc the NVA’s Tet Offensive wreaked on the U.S. supply system, to uniquely severe weather, to the choices made by a competent enemy, to false assumptions, and, in some cases, to ego-driven decision-making.
That the book succeeds on just these two levels make it worthwhile reading for U.S. leaders and soldiers. What makes this book truly essential reading, I believe, is its success on a third level: its unusually frank discussion of how American military culture, when faced with tragic mistakes, can cause service members to “close ranks” and be less than fully honest with themselves and each other.
Krohn discusses the nervous breakdown of the division commander at the height of the battle—a breakdown that was suppressed and went unreported to higher. He relates how the division’s embedded historians inaccurately described the battle, to include the notion that the battalion’s advance was supported by “indirect fire artillery, aerial rocket artillery, and helicopter gunships.” (The only item close to the truth here was that a lone gunship did try to aid the battalion’s advance, but this gunship accidentally fired upon the battalion rather than the enemy.) The historians are not to blame for these inaccuracies, though. They recorded what was reported to them by 1st Cavalry Division leaders. Krohn also discusses the damage done to the battalion commander’s reputation by the division commander, an ambitious man who clearly made errors and who just as clearly wanted to scapegoat the battalion commander for these errors.
In short, blatant careerism and the distorted, overly positive reports of subordinates created a false narrative—a myth—that could have inhibited learning and damned our Army to repeat the same mistakes. This institutional tendency toward self-deception, Krohn suggests, poses a danger that all American military leaders need to be aware of and to resist. I agree. Krohn’s story sounds uncomfortable echoes in the present, such as in the growing number of myths surrounding the Abu Ghraib debacle. (“Those crimes had nothing to do with interrogation policy.” “Only a few bad military apples tortured prisoners.” “Only the CIA tortured systematically: the military institution chose the moral high ground.” Etc.)
“The Lost Battalion” is not without its flaws. Considering the loss of so many of his comrades, Krohn’s analysis is (understandably) not always dispassionate, making it slightly suspect in a few places. Nonetheless, by unearthing the truth and enabling honest conversations to take place about what happened, Krohn has performed a valuable service, both to the Army and to the memory of his dead comrades. If there is any justice in the world, “The Lost Battalion” will become a hallowed U.S. Army classic. Its pages convey greater candor, realism, and a sense of immediacy to today’s U.S. military professional than the pages of nearly all of the other books enshrined today as essential Army reading. All U.S. Army students, from cadets to colonels at the War College, can enjoy—and gain grim lessons from—this exciting, tragic, and searingly honest book.
Because reports then and since focused on the Marines' role in the battle, I did not know, or forgot, that Air Cavs were also called in, not really knowing till I chanced upon "The Lost Battalion of Tet" by Charles A. Krohn.
Krohn was with the 2/12th Cavalry. He was battalion S-2 responsible for gathering intelligence on VC and NVA movements, and was surprisingly good at his job. I say surprising because I was the clerk-driver-RTO for the S-2 in another battalion, the 4/39th of the 9th Division, and I never had the feeling that any of my rotating first-lieutenant bosses knew what was going on in our area. That's less disrespect for their youthful ignorance than it is great respect for the far greater wiles and wits of Sir Victor Charles.
Luck played a role with Captain Krohn, who was the beneficiary of a captured map that gave a clear indication of NVA plans to attack his Air Cav basecamp. With that information Krohn as S-2 could alert the troops on what to expect, and how best to fight the attack.
Here I must say that as battalion RTO I generally felt safe from the war's greater horrors, but I also felt an unspoken dread of what might happen if our basecamp was attacked and overrun. No one ever discussed such a possibility, so I had no idea how I'd react, or how I should react, and can only thank my stars that such an attack never came -- though it came to the 196th Brigade, Americal Division, a couple years after my return, when NVA troops swept across FSB Mary Ann, killing 33 GIs.
Who knew that even amid such fright one could calmly fight back? Not till I read Krohn's careful discussion on pages 43 and 44 of his paperback edition did I know. Here he details his warning to troops how the attack would likely begin, and how the best thing was to stay in place wherever you were -- even from the latrine -- and fend the flying doo from there. With such discipline, each trooper could then feel free to shoot anything that moves.
"The only way to defeat this tactic is to keep watching, and you've go to think about this from now on. You may get wounded, but better wounded than dead."
And when the attack sure enough came (while Krohn was on long-planned R&R), the battalion fought them off: not one NVA sapper made it through the barbed wire, and only one U.S. defender was killed, with 63 wounded.
And hey, did the troopers welcome R&R Krohn back? You bet they did: hailed as hero, everywhere he went, someone offering him a chilled beer.
That adventure alone would make "The Lost Battalion of Tet" worth reading for any soldier, but every trooper could also benefit from meditating Krohn's discussion of how to stay calm through days of intense fighting when men are dying all around. Do you think about death? No, you think about what's right in front of you: "During the pauses between gunfire bursts, soldiers concentrated on what they were doing" -- to include digging a better foxhole.
The main point of the book, of course, is how U.S. troops were sent into battle without proper support, and how the ghosts of the needlessly slain called to Krohn to tell their story. Many former officers didn't want the story of TFP told, and it's one reason so many decades have passed without wider awareness of the Air Cavs' role in Tet: how one badly mauled battalion managed to find its way home by defying conventional tactics and orders, and by walking away from the battle in the night: a wondrously disciplined movement that saved survivors from sure annihilation.
And I cannot close without expressing admiration for Charles A. Krohn's literary endurance: for battling decades of rejection and defeat, ever revising, ever coming back, ever reinforcing his diligent research -- his writer's spirit alone made it mandatory for me to read "The Lost Battalion of Tet."
Postscript: I rarely read publisher blurbs, but one quote on the inside cover page caught my eye after I read "The Lost Battalion." The writer credits Krohn for his "trenchant humor." One anecdote quickly came to mind: when Krohn was ordered by the battalion S-3 of higher rank to share his small, carefully dug trench with an RTO. "But he's an enlisted man. Do you think it's proper?" In such cramped quarters they slept, Krohn awakening in the night when the EM rubbed his leg lightly into Krohn's groin. "It was my only erotic experience of the campaign!" Krohn writes. In turn, from distant retrospect, a new generation asked Krohn how it felt to be in such a battle. He hesitated, then -- read the book if you want to know his flaccid reply.
Post postscript: Is it possible we're going to see the horror of Hue relived in the battle for Aleppo? See especially "Save Aleppo!" by Bernard-Henri Levy on the unfolding horrors in Syria ...
Top reviews from other countries
Dans sa préface à la réédition, Krohn souligne combien son ouvrage lui a valu de réactions de la part des vétérans de l'unité ou de leurs familles. Il a revu d'ailleurs le chiffre des pertes : les tués passent de 60 à 81. Plus intéressant peut-être pour lui, un historien militaire du Center of Military History l'a contacté en 2006 pour l'histoire officielle de la guerre du Viêtnam qu'il était en train de composer. Krohn, à partir de son expérience au Viêtnam, pensait qu'une troupe d'infanterie légère ne pouvait résister à une force supérieure en nombre sans soutien d'artillerie. C'est ce qu'il plaida auprès du général Franks quand il vit avec horreur, raconte-t-il, que la 10th Mountain Division américaine partait en Afghanistan sans artillerie. Heureusement, dit-il aussi, la division suivante y allait munie d'un soutien d'artillerie ! Révélateur d'une certaine pensée américaine de la guerre, comme on le verra plus loin...
Le 3 février 1968, les 400 hommes du 2/12th Cavalry sont jetés au nord de Hué contre une position retranchée nord-viêtnamienne, avec pour seul appui un gunship, sans soutien d'artillerie ni de l'aviation. A 3 contre 1, le commandant nord-viêtnamien tend un piège aux Américains et réussit à les encercler. Les premiers obus américains n'arrivent finalement que neuf heures après le premier contact avec l'ennemi. Le commandant du bataillon, Sweet, décide finalement d'opérer une percée vers l'ouest en laissant sur place les morts et le matériel lourd. Ces pertes tragiques provoquées par un manque de soutien sont exceptionnellement rares, selon l'auteur, dans l'armée américaine engagée au Viêtnam. Le général Tolson, commandant la 1st Cavalry Division, a en effet envoyé dans l'enfer un bataillon de sa 3rd Brigade pour dégager Hué, le 1er février 1968 : les Américains sont alors persuadés que l'assaut contre la ville est de faible envergure. Ce même jour, le 2/12 Cavalry est héliporté à PK 17, un camp au nord de Hué. Mais sans l'équipement lourd des soldats, ni leur soutien d'artillerie : seuls 2 tubes de 105 de l'ARVN sont sur la base pour soutenir les Américains. Et le gunship qui leur est affecté, le lendemain, commence par un friendly fire de bon augure...
Alors officier de renseignements (S-2) Krohn a participé lui-même à l'engagement. Précédemment, la 1st Air Cavalry Division a rencontré évasivement l'armée nord-viêtnamienne, fin 1967 et jusqu'au début 1968 et l'offensive du Têt, dans la vallée de Que Son. Le 3 février, le 2/12 Cavalry est envoyé à la sauvette, sans équipement lourd ni soutien, contre le 6ème régiment nord-viêtnamien dont des éléments protègent, en fait, rien moins que le PC de l'opération menée contre la ville de Hué. Encerclés, les Américains, sous les ordres du lieutenant-colonel Sweet, réalisent alors une percée nocturne qui leur sera beaucoup reprochée car ils ont temporairement abandonné les corps de leurs camarades. Pourtant l'unité se voit attribuer la citation présidentielle et 11 Distinguished Service Crosses.
Il est intéressant de voir comment Krohn semble atterré par cette expérience tragique qui n'aurait, selon lui, jamais dû arriver. Une bonne partie de l'ouvrage est d'ailleurs consacrée à déterminer les responsabilités, et en particulier celles des officiers supérieurs ou généraux de la 1st Air Cav. Sur le fond, on ne peut que constater la répugnance des officiers de la 1st Air Cavalry Division, pourtant souvent considérée comme faisant partie de l'élite de l'US Army au Viêtnam, à engager un adversaire, même supérieur en nombre, sans appui d'artillerie ou autre soutien. Comme si le combat au contact était une gageure pour l'armée américaine. C'est sans doute l'enseignement le plus intéressant du livre, à propos de la conception américaine de la guerre de manière générale. Comme beaucoup d'autres ouvrages du même genre, celui de Krohn est américanocentré. L'auteur essaye cependant, sur 6 pages, de se mettre à la place des Nord-Viêtnamiens, mais cela reste insuffisant et pas très convaincant. Imaginez que vous avez commandé un plat au restaurant et qu'on vous en apporte seulement la moitié, et que le serveur vous annonce que l'on n'a pas trouvé l'autre moitié pour vous la servir. C'est un peu l'impression que peut ressentir l'historien de formation quand on voit le récit d'un engagement comme celui-là, plutôt de faible envergure, mais vu seulement d'un côté. Un monologue en quelque sorte qui n'a d'intérêt que parce qu'il fournit l'analyse d'un engagement entre Américains et Nord-Viêtnamiens pendant l'offensive du Têt -en se basant largement sur des témoignages de vétérans et les documents officiels américains, comme le montre la bibliographie sinon très réduite (6 ouvrages !).
Notons cependant la présence de cartes en parallèle du texte (pas forcément très nettes, mais elles ont le mérite d'être là et assez nombreuses), d'un livret photo central et d'annexes fournis (composition d'un bataillon, liste des pertes, citation présidentielle, liste des DSC décernées à l'unité).





