FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[70]It was around this time that PCV was formed and General Abrams departed I Corps. General Rosson then became a key figure in the planning of the operation.[71]Although the rifle companies encountered only slight resistance during the assault, the Company A command group, while advancing toward the objective, took a direct hit from an enemy mortar. The Air Officer, Captain Walter C. Jones, III was killed as was one radio operator; the battalion Operations Officer, Major Ted R. Henderson, was seriously wounded and evacuated. The Battalion Commander, Lieutenant Colonel Cahill and his Artillery Officer, First Lieutenant John K. LeBlond, Jr. were also wounded at that time but were able to continue.[72]In addition to the Marine killed during the attack, nine were killed by enemy shelling the night before. A total of 57 Marines were medevaced.[73]The325CNVADivisionhad long since departed the area and left the304thto continue pressure on the 26th Marines. Some elements of the304thswung to the north of the base and replaced units of the325C.[74]The 2d Battalion, 26th Marines did not return to Quang Tri with the regiment but was transferred to the operational control of the 4th Marines at Camp Carroll. General Tompkins saw to it that each man who returned from Khe Sanh immediately received a hot shower, a clean uniform, and a big steak dinner. As an added touch, the 3d Marine Division band was on hand, and greeted each arrival with a stirring rendition of the "Marines Hymn."

[70]It was around this time that PCV was formed and General Abrams departed I Corps. General Rosson then became a key figure in the planning of the operation.

[71]Although the rifle companies encountered only slight resistance during the assault, the Company A command group, while advancing toward the objective, took a direct hit from an enemy mortar. The Air Officer, Captain Walter C. Jones, III was killed as was one radio operator; the battalion Operations Officer, Major Ted R. Henderson, was seriously wounded and evacuated. The Battalion Commander, Lieutenant Colonel Cahill and his Artillery Officer, First Lieutenant John K. LeBlond, Jr. were also wounded at that time but were able to continue.

[72]In addition to the Marine killed during the attack, nine were killed by enemy shelling the night before. A total of 57 Marines were medevaced.

[73]The325CNVADivisionhad long since departed the area and left the304thto continue pressure on the 26th Marines. Some elements of the304thswung to the north of the base and replaced units of the325C.

[74]The 2d Battalion, 26th Marines did not return to Quang Tri with the regiment but was transferred to the operational control of the 4th Marines at Camp Carroll. General Tompkins saw to it that each man who returned from Khe Sanh immediately received a hot shower, a clean uniform, and a big steak dinner. As an added touch, the 3d Marine Division band was on hand, and greeted each arrival with a stirring rendition of the "Marines Hymn."

On 23 May 1968, several members of the 26th Marines who had fought at Khe Sanh had a reunion of sorts in Washington, D. C. and the surroundings were a far cry from the dirt and grime of the combat base. The "CP" belonged to the President of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson. In the Cabinet Room of the White House, the Commander in Chief paused to honor the men of the 26th Marines and awarded the Presidential Unit Citation to the regiment. Colonel Lownds, whose large handle-bar mustache had been shaved off at the direction of "the highest possible authority"--his wife, and Sergeant Major Agrippa W. Smith, senior enlisted man at the KSCB, were on hand to receive the award. While it was fitting that the 26th Marines be cited as a unit, the President also praised the South Vietnamese, U. S. Army, U. S. Navy, U. S. Air Force, and Marine aviation and support units which contributed so gallantly to the defense of the installation.(223)

In some quarters, however, there were still grumblings over the Khe Sanh issue. During the siege, there had been a virtual storm of protest from critics who opposed the Administration's decision to hold the base. These doomsday prophets suffered from what some military experts referred to as the "Dien Bien Phu Syndrome." Many noted intellectuals were in the van of this group and throughout the battle they could not be convinced that air and artillery support would provide the margin of difference; they warned that the tiny base would suffer the same fate which had been meted out to the French garrison 14 years earlier.(224)

During the presentation of the Presidential Unit Citation to the 26th Marines, President Lyndon B. Johnson (C) congratulates Sergeant Major Agrippa W. Smith (L) while Colonel David E. Lownds (R) looks on.

There are several reasons why Khe Sanh did not become another Dien Bien Phu. The first and most obvious being that the Americans possessed the overwhelming supporting arms which were not available to the French. Contrary to the predictions of many critics, air and artillery were decisive and more than made up for the numerical superiority of the enemy. Over 100,000 tons of bombs and 150,000 artillery rounds were delivered--and delivered intelligently--by the Americans during the siege. Much of the credit goes to the regimental commander and his staff who knew how to coordinate their different sources of firepower to achieve maximum results. The NVA learned this during thefive major attacks against the base and hill outposts.

The ability to keep Khe Sanh resupplied was another major factor. The NVA encirclement did not coincide with the monsoon season by accident. With Route 9 interdicted, the fate of the garrison hinged on the success or failure of the airlift and apparently the North Vietnamese anticipated that it would fail. The fact that the airlift was successful in the face of heavy enemy fire and the foulest weather imaginable is indeed a tribute to the aircrews and recovery personnel but the resupply effort went much deeper than just delivering the goods. The Force Logistics Command at Da Nang augmented by U. S. Army sources at Cam Ranh Bay was responsible for the mountain of supplies and material which sustained the 26th Marines. An excerpt from the works of Winston Churchill which was selected as the motto of the Force Logistics Command best describes the vital role these logistics agencies played: "Victory is the beautiful colored flower. Supply is the stem without which it could never have blossomed."(225)

Another important facet of the defense was the close supervision and leadership provided by the senior commanders, namely CG, 3d MarDiv, CG, III MAF, and ComUSMACV. Since much of the supporting arms and all of the logistical support was handled by agencies external to the 26th Marines, constant coordination among these three headquarters was imperative. General Tompkins was the pivotal figure of the triumvirate. During his daily trips to the base, the general learned first hand what the regimental commander needed; he not only saw that Colonel Lownds received adequate support but he insured that the defenders made the most of their resources. In so doing he exposed himself to heavy enemy antiaircraft, artillery, and mortar fire as did General Cushman during his periodic visits to Khe Sanh. Commenting on the strong role played by the 3d Marine Division commander, General Cushman later said, "General Tompkins made or approved every major decision during the battle."(226)

The real hero of Khe Sanh, however, was on the opposite end of the rank scale--the individual fighting man. For 77 days the defenders waited in the trenchlines while the bulk of the credit and publicity went to the artillery, fighter/bombers, and B-52s. On several occasions the supporting arms could not prevent major enemy assaults from reaching the wire; at this point, it was the Marines or ARVN Rangers, armed with rifles, grenades, and bayonets, who stopped the North Vietnamese--often in bitter hand-to-hand combat. Without exception, the battalioncommanders were lavish in their praise of the young Americans and South Vietnamese who held the perimeter and denied the enemy a much-needed victory. In spite of the inherent hardships which accompanied the siege and the incessant shelling, the defenders were always itching for a fight. The most overused expression during the battle was, "I wish they (North Vietnamese) would hurry up and come so we can get this thing over with." When asked by a reporter if the NVA troops could take Khe Sanh, one officer answered, "Hell no, those 19-year-old Marines won't let them."[75](227)

Finally, much of the credit for the American success at Khe Sanh belongs to the NVA. The North Vietnamese obliged the 26th Marines by standing toe to toe in a slugging contest during which they were outgunned and outfought; in effect, the enemy destroyed himself. If there was one salient feature which resulted in the enemy's defeat it might well be his rigid adherence to a siege strategy in the face of certain failure. Even when it became obvious that the Americans were aware of their master plan, the North Vietnamese doggedly pursued their siege tactics without alteration. The extremely lucrative target presented by the massed NVA forces which ringed the base was one of the main reasons the garrison was maintained. Thus, the question may be legitimately asked, "Who besieged whom?"(228)

To a lesser degree, there was a controversy over who or what had won the battle. Proponents of air power and strategic bombing were the most vocal; they felt that the B-52 had been the most decisive instrument of defense. While the Stratofortress was a valuable asset and, without doubt played a major role, any attempt to single out one supporting arm as the ultimate weapon in the battle would be futile. The B-52 was but one part of an intricate defensive fire plan. The bombers struck targets beyond 1,100 meters of the base; tactical air and artillery took up the slack to within about 250 meters and the organic weaponry of the defenders provided close-in fires. The system was balanced and effective but, if any part were eliminated, the defenders would have paid a much higher price in casualties. Both General Tompkins and Colonel Lownds were unstinting intheir praise of all supporting arms, as well as the logistical effort; they stressed, and stressed heavily, that the defense of Khe Sanh was a joint endeavor. The highly successful results were achieved through the contributions of all U. S. Services and the South Vietnamese. While the Marines had been unable to find an infantryman who could carry a 27-ton payload, neither had the U. S. Air Force come up with a B-52 which could man a foxhole. Both, in their own way, were essential.(229)

The Khe Sanh story again became news in late June 1968 and the old controversy over strategy was rekindled. Prior to leaving his post as ComUSMACV on 11 June, General Westmoreland visited PCV Headquarters in I Corps and approved the recommendations of Generals Cushman and Rosson to raze the KSCB and withdraw all Allied forces to the Ca Lu area. While General Westmoreland made the decision prior to his departure, he did not close the base at that time, because mopping-up operations were being conducted around Khe Sanh. In addition, large amounts of supplies had been stockpiled there and the general deemed it more economical to maintain the base while these stocks were consumed in support of the operations rather than backhaul them to Ca Lu. For these reasons, he left the choice concerning the optimum time to dismantle the installation up to his successor, General Abrams. When bulldozers finally began to level the bunkers and structures which had housed the 26th Marines throughout the siege, the American people wondered why the base had been so tenaciously defended if it was to be eventually abandoned. Had American blood been shed in vain? Critics of the hold-out policy argued that, in the final analysis, they had been right and those who decided to defend the base had been wrong. Such rationale pinpointed the inability of many Americans to break away from the techniques employed in past wars and recognize the peculiarities of the conflict in Vietnam.

There were several reasons for the deactivation of the KSCB since, for all practical purposes, the base had outlived its usefulness. The rationale endorsed by General Cushman and General Rosson was threefold. First, the enemy had reduced his forces and changed hismodusoperandiin the Khe Sanh area. Secondly, the NVA artillery in Laos had accurately targeted the base and access road which compounded the casualty and resupply problems. Finally and most important, General Cushman had sufficient assets in June to pursue the mobile offensive strategy which he had advocated strongly for such a long time. Two U. S. Army divisions (i.e. 1st ACD and the 101st Airborne) with theirinherent helicopter resources had been shifted to III MAF and, during March and April, the tremendous logistics burden associated with the introduction of these 50,000 men into northern I Corps had been alleviated. Since he had sufficient maneuver elements to go on the offense in western Quang Tri Province, General Cushman no longer needed five battalions buttoned up in Khe Sanh.(230)

An additional consideration for the abandonment of the base was President Johnson's announcement on 31 March that the U. S. would end air strikes in North Vietnam.[76]While the decision was a major step toward peace, it also enabled thousands of NVA support personnel who were responsible for road repair in North Vietnam to move further south. These workers constructed a network of infiltration arteries which bypassed the combat base and the continued policy of positioning static Allied defense installations in the path of these routes would have been inefficient and undesirable. In this regard, the best defense was a highly mobile offense and while a forward operating base for such operations was essential, the LZ Stud/Ca Lu area was much better suited than Khe Sanh.(231)

By the time PEGASUS was over, LZ Stud was in full operation. The airstrip was extended to accommodate C-123s, a Force Logistics Area was established, and local defenses were strengthened. The base was outside the range of the North Vietnamese 130mm and 152mm guns in Laos and the stretch of Route 9 from Ca Lu to the Rockpile and eventually Dong Ha was easier to keep open. Thus, two factors--enemy shelling and resupply problems--which had negated the effectiveness of Khe Sanh as a base of operations were absent at LZ Stud.

While not physically located on the Khe Sanh Plateau, the forces at LZ Stud controlled it. Two forward fire bases were established in the vicinity of the old combat base from which extensive patrolling was conducted. Ground patrols were supplemented by air surveillance. Whenever contact with the enemy was made, lighting-fast helicopter assaults were launched from LZ Stud and were supported by the artillery of the forward fire bases, tactical aircraft, and Huey gunships. The enemy was attacked by these mobile forces whenever and wherever he appeared.When a major NVA unit was encountered, sufficient reinforcements were also injected by helicopter. So, the only thing that changed on the Khe Sanh Plateau, besides the face of the combat base, was the style and tempo of operations.(232)

The new strategy by no means diminished the accomplishments of the men who had held Khe Sanh; it was simply a continuation of the battle in another form. When the leaders in Hanoi finally accepted President Johnson's peace overtures and consented to meet with U. S. representatives in Paris, there was one thing that the North Vietnamese negotiators did not possess--the battle standard of the 26th Marines. An editorial in theWashingtonStarprovided an appropriate tribute to the men of Khe Sanh:

To be sure, Khe Sanh will be a subject of controversy for a long time, but this much about it is indisputable: It has won a large place in the history of the Vietnam war as an inspiring example of American and Allied valor. One day, in fact, the victory over the siege may be judged a decisive turning point that finally convinced the enemy he could not win.(233)

FOOTNOTES:[75]Many of these young men exhibited a maturity beyond their years. One message, scrawled on the back of a C-ration carton by an anonymous Marine, was found after the siege. It read: "Life has a special flavor to those who fight for it that the sheltered never know."[76]The attacks were halted except in the area north of the demilitarized zone where the continuing enemy buildup directly threatened Allied forward positions and where the movements of their troops and supplies clearly related to that threat.

[75]Many of these young men exhibited a maturity beyond their years. One message, scrawled on the back of a C-ration carton by an anonymous Marine, was found after the siege. It read: "Life has a special flavor to those who fight for it that the sheltered never know."

[76]The attacks were halted except in the area north of the demilitarized zone where the continuing enemy buildup directly threatened Allied forward positions and where the movements of their troops and supplies clearly related to that threat.

ExplanatoryNote: Unless otherwise noted the material in this monograph is derived from Admiral Ulysses S. G. Sharp, USN, and General William C. Westmoreland, USA,ReportOnTheWarInVietnam, hereafter Sharp and Westmoreland,ReportOnTheWar; Maj John J. Cahill, USMC, and Jack Shulimson, "History of U. S. Marine Corps Operations in Vietnam, Jan-Jun65"; FMFPac, Operations of U. S. Marine Forces Vietnam, Mar67-Apr68, hereafterFMFPacMarineOpnsinVietnam; FMFPac, U. S. Marine Corps Forces in Vietnam Mar65-Sep67 Historical Summary, Volume I: Narrative, hereafterFMFPacHistSum; III MAF Command Chronologies Apr67-Apr68, hereafterIIIMAFCmdChron; 3d Marine Division Command Chronologies, Apr67-Apr68, hereafter3dMarDivCmdChron; 1st Marine Aircraft Wing Command Chronologies, Apr67-Apr68, hereafter1stMAWCmdChron; 26th Marines Command Chronologies, Apr67-Apr68, hereafter26thMarinesCmdChron; 1/26 Command Chronologies, Apr67-Apr68, hereafter1/26CmdChron; 2/26 Command Chronologies, Jan68-Apr68, hereafter2/26CmdChron; 3/26 Command Chronologies, Jun67-Apr68, hereafter3/26CmdChron; 3d Marines Khe Sanh Operations After Action Report, 9Jun67, hereafter3dMarinesKheSanhAAR; VMGR-152 Command Chronologies Jan68-Apr68, hereafterVMGR-152CmdChron; Marine Corps Command Center, Status of Forces, Apr68, hereafterMCCCStatus ofForces; Defense Intelligence Bulletins Dec67-Apr68, hereafterDIAIntBul; Six Month Evaluation Report, prepared by HQ, MACV 31May68; Presentation of LtGen Robert E. Cushman, Jr., USMC, in 1968 General Officers Symposium Book, HQMC, dtd 15Jul68; CG, FMFPac msg to CMC dtd 200327Z Mar68; Combat Operations After Action Report, Operation PEGASUS (C), hereafterPEGASUSAAR; Gen William C. Westmoreland ltr to CMC dtd 14Dec68, Subj: Review of the draft manuscript "The Battle of Khe Sanh Apr67-Apr68," hereafterWestmorelandComments; LtGen Lewis W. Walt Interviews with HistBr dtd 17Dec67 and 14Jan69; LtGen Robert E. Cushman, Jr., USMC, ltr to Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff, G-3, HQMC, dtd 26Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterCushmanComments; LtGen Herman Nickerson, USMC, memo to Assistant Chief of Staff, G-3, HQMC, dtd Dec68, Subj: Review of draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh Apr67-Apr68," hereafterNickersonComments; LtGen William B. Rosson, USA, ltr to CMC dtd 18Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterRossonComments; LtGen John J. Tolson, III, USA, ltr to CMC dtd 21Jan69,Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterTolsonComments; MajGen Norman J. Anderson, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 2Jan69, Subj: Khe Sanh Historical Monograph, hereafterAndersonComments; MajGen Louis Metzger, USMC, memo to Assistant Chief of Staff, G-3, HQMC, dtd 23Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterMetzgerComments; MajGen John R. Chaisson comments on draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterChaissonComments; Interview with MajGen Rathvon McC. Tompkins, USMC, dtd 26Aug68 No. 3088 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC), hereafterTompkinsInterview; Deputy Chief of Staff (Air) comments on draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh," dtd 9Dec68, hereafterDCS/AirComments; BGen Robert P. Keller, USMC, ltr to Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 17Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterKellerComments; BGen Harry C. Olson, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 13Jan69, Subj. "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterOlsonComments; BGen Carl W. Hoffman, USMC, ltr to CMC (Code AO3D) dtd 22Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterHoffmanComments; Chief, USAF Historical Division Liaison Office ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 18Dec68, Subj: Review of Historical Study, "The Battle of Khe Sanh"; Chief, Historical Studies Branch, USAF Historical Division ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 22Jan69, Subj: Review of Historical Study, "The Battle of Khe Sanh"; Chief, Project CORONA HARVEST ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 15Jan69, Subj: Review of Draft Manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterAirForceHistoricalComments; Interview with Col David E. Lownds, USMC, dtd Jul68, No. 801 674/4 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC), hereafterLowndsJulInterview; Col David E. Lownds, USMC, Interview with HistBr dtd 13Sep68, hereafterLowndsSepInterview; Col Frank E. Wilson, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 6Jan69, Subj: Review of "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterWilsonComments; Col Bruce F. Meyers, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 16Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh" hereafterMeyersComments; Interview with Col Franklin N. Pippin, USMC, dtd 24Jun68, No. 2907 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Interview with Col Johnnie C. Vance, Jr., USMC, dtd 20Jun68, No. 2909 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Col Robert D. Brown, USAF, ltr to HQMC (AO3D) dtd 8Jan69, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh" hereafterBrownComments; Col Robert E. Brofft, USAF, ltr to HQMC (AO3D) dtd 8Jan69, Subj: Monograph, "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterBrofftComments; LtCol John F. Mitchell, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 31Jan69, Subj: Comments on "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterMitchellComments; LtCol Harry L. Alderman, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3Division, HQMC, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh" hereafterAldermanComments; LtCol James B. Wilkinson, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd Dec68, Subj: Response to HQMC ltr AO3D-rem S807 373 of 6Dec68, "The Battle of Khe Sanh," hereafterWilkinsonComments; LtCol John A. Hennelly, USMC, comments on draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh" of 15Feb69, hereafterHennellyComments; Interview with LtCol Edward J. A. Castagna, USMC, dtd Mar68, No. 2621 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); LtCol Francis J. Heath, Jr., USMC, comments on draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterHeathComments; LtCol Frederick J. McEwan, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 30Dec68, Subj: Comments on "The Battle of Khe Sanh Apr67-Apr68," hereafterMcEwanComments; LtCol Johnny O. Gregerson, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3, HQMC dtd 3Jan69, Subj: Review of a draft copy of the historical monograph: "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterGregersonComments; LtCol John C. Studt, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3, HQMC dtd 24Dec68, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh" manuscript, hereafterStudtComments; Interview with LtCol Harry T. Hagaman, USMC, dtd 2Mar68, No. 2548 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); LtCol William J. White, USMC, comments on draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68" n.d., hereafterWhiteComments; Interview with Maj William J. Sullivan, USMC, dtd 26Apr68, No. 2621 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Maj John A. Shepherd, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, dtd 2Jan69, Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68" hereafter Shepherd Comments; Taped comments of Maj Matthew P. Caulfield, USMC, on the draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68" dtd 2Jan69, hereafterCaulfieldComments; Interview with Maj Matthew P. Caulfield, USMC, dtd 10Feb68, No. 2535 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Maj Wayne M. Wills, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3, HQMC, dtd 2Jan69, Subj: Historical Monograph, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterWillsComments; Maj Harper L. Bohr, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3, HQMC, dtd 18Dec68, Subj: Comments concerning "The Battle of Khe Sanh" hereafterBohrComments; Maj Jerry E. Hudson, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3, HQMC, dtd 2Jan69, Subj: Review of Historical Monograph of Khe Sanh, hereafterHudsonComments; Maj Mirza M. Baig, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC dtd 23Dec68, Subj: Comments on draft manuscript, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68" hereafterBaigComments; Maj William H. Dabney, USMC, comments on draft manuscript n.d., "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68" hereafterDabneyComments; Maj William H. Dabney, USMC, Interview with HistBr dtd 10Jan69; Maj Earl G. Breeding, USMC, comments on draft manuscript dtd 22Dec68, "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68," hereafterBreedingComments; Interview with Capt Earl G. Breeding, dtd Jul68, No. 2121 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Maj Kenneth W. Pipes, USMC ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, n.d., Subj: Khe Sanh Manuscript, hereafterPipesComments; Interview with Capt Kenneth W. Pipes, USMC, dtd Mar68, No. 2621 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); 1stLt James M. Alexander, USMC, ltr to HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC, n.d., Subj: "The Battle of Khe Sanh, Apr67-Apr68" hereafterAlexanderComments; Interview with 1stLt James M. Alexander, USMC, dtd 26Apr68, No. 2621 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Interview with 1stLt William L. Everhart, USMC, dtd 10Feb68, No. 2535 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Interview with Sgt Timothy B. Keady, USMC, dtd Mar68, No. 2621 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); Interview with HM3 Frank V. Calzia, USN, dtd Mar68, No. 2621 (Oral History Collection, HistBr, HQMC); LCpl Michael A. Barry, USMC, Interview with HistBr dtd 17Feb69; Cornelius D. Sullivan,etal.,TheVietnamWar:ItsConductandHigherDirection(Washington, D. C.: The Center For Strategic Studies, Georgetown University, 1968) (U), hereafter Sullivan,etal.,TheVietnamWar; Bernard B. Fall,TheTwoViet-Nams(New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1965 ed.) (U); Colonel Robert D. Heinl, Jr., USMC,SoldiersoftheSea(Annapolis: United States Naval Institute 1962 ed.) (U); Capt Ken Kashiwahara, USAF, "Lifeline to Khe Sanh,"TheAirman, v. XII, no. 7 (Jul68) (U), hereafter Kashiwahara, "Lifeline to Khe Sanh";WashingtonStar, 25May68, p. 13 (Early Bird) (U);WashingtonStar, 9Jun68, p. 1-E (Early Bird);BaltimoreSun, 25May68, p. 2 (Early Bird) (U). All documentary material cited is located in the HistBr, G-3 Division, HQMC and, unless otherwise noted, carries an overall classification of Secret.

Back to Index Next