No Sure Victory:Measuring U.S. Army Effectiveness and Progress in the Vietnam War

Main Themes and Topics

No Sure Victory: Measuring U.S. Army Effectiveness and Progress in the Vietnam War by Gregory A. Daddis delves into the complexities of assessing military success in the context of the Vietnam War. The book challenges the traditional view that the U.S. Army relied solely on body counts as indicators of progress. Instead, Daddis reveals the Army's extensive and intricate system of metrics—ranging from force ratios and air sorties to population control and base area security—intended to measure success in a multifaceted conflict.

Daddis examines how these numerous and, at times, contradictory metrics often hindered the Army's ability to effectively evaluate and respond to the realities on the ground. Through this exploration, the book also offers a critical perspective on the broader implications of measurement and assessment in military strategy, providing a cautionary tale for current and future armed conflicts, particularly in unconventional warfare scenarios.

Writing Style and Tone

Gregory A. Daddis employs a scholarly and analytical tone throughout No Sure Victory. The writing is dense with historical detail and built on extensive research, which may appeal to those with a keen interest in military history or strategy. Daddis's meticulous documentation and incisive analysis provide a comprehensive and thought-provoking narrative that encourages readers to reconsider widely held beliefs about the Vietnam War's military dynamics.

Brief Summary (no spoilers)

No Sure Victory provides an in-depth exploration of the methods the U.S. Army used to measure military effectiveness during the Vietnam War. Rather than relying on a single metric like body counts, the Army employed an elaborate system of measurements intended to quantify various aspects of military operations. However, Daddis argues that this complex system often led to a focus on data collection at the expense of meaningful analysis, obscuring the true nature of military outcomes and contributing to strategic misjudgments.