Changes

Terry Burstall, a private in the 12 Platoon section guarding D Company HQ during the battle, has contradicted Australian official accounts of Vietnamese losses:{{cquote|When I returned to the battlefield the day after the battle, there were bodies lying all through the area ... Would a shell-shocked digger count an arm, a trunk and a leg scattered over several metres as one body or three bodies? Nobody knew or cared at the time, and certainly not the people doing the counting. ...Looking back I don't really think that I would have seen more than 50 bodies and I spent three days in the area.<ref>Terry Burstall, A Soldier Returns, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane, 1990, pp 77-79</ref>}}

Terry Burstall, a private in the 12 Platoon section guarding D Company HQ during the battle, has contradicted Australian official accounts of Vietnamese losses:{{cquote|When I returned to the battlefield the day after the battle, there were bodies lying all through the area ... Would a shell-shocked digger count an arm, a trunk and a leg scattered over several metres as one body or three bodies? Nobody knew or cared at the time, and certainly not the people doing the counting. ...Looking back I don't really think that I would have seen more than 50 bodies and I spent three days in the area.<ref>Terry Burstall, A Soldier Returns, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane, 1990, pp 77-79</ref>}}

The recent Australian claim that 2,500-3,000 Vietnamese were involved in the battle with D Company is not supported by all Australian authors. Lieutenant-Colonel Bob Breen, author of ''First to Fight'' (the history of 1 RAR's first tour in Vietnam) has written that ''"the Viet Cong 275th Regiment ran into D Company in teeming monsoon rain"'' and that ''"for several hours just over 100 Diggers withstood the best efforts of over 1500 Viet Cong soldiers to kill them."''<ref>Duty First: The Royal Australian Regiment in War and Peace, p. 215, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1990</ref>

The more recent Australian claim that 2,500-3,000 Vietnamese were involved in the battle with D Company is not supported by all Australian authors. Lieutenant-Colonel [[Bob Breen]], author of ''First to Fight'' (the history of 1 RAR's first tour in Vietnam) has written that ''"the Viet Cong 275th Regiment ran into D Company in teeming monsoon rain"'' and that ''"for several hours just over 100 Diggers withstood the best efforts of over 1500 Viet Cong soldiers to kill them."''<ref>Duty First: The Royal Australian Regiment in War and Peace, p. 215, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1990</ref>

Vietnam veterans have also reported that Australian soldiers shot or bayoneted wounded VC no longer trying to defend themeselves. Bob Buick faced criticism in 2000, after admitting that he killed a mortally-wounded Vietnamese soldier on the battlefield, the day after the battle. Such an act would have been technically in breach of the [[Geneva Convention]] and therefore a war crime. Buick was criticised by both Burstall and the president of the Australian Long Tan Association, John Heslewood. Burstall commented: ''"Bob says it was a mercy killing ... would he have done the same to an Australian?"''<ref>[http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/stories/s164813.htm Hero of Long Tan's "mercy killing" upsets comrades]</ref>

Vietnam veterans have also reported that Australian soldiers shot or bayoneted wounded VC no longer trying to defend themselves. [[Bob Buick]] faced criticism in 2000, after admitting that he killed a mortally-wounded Vietnamese soldier on the battlefield, the day after the battle. Such an act would have been in breach of the [[Geneva Convention]] and therefore a war crime. Buick was criticised by both Burstall and then president of the Australian Long Tan Association, John Heslewood. Burstall commented: ''"Bob says it was a mercy killing ... would he have done the same to an Australian?"''<ref>[http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/stories/s164813.htm Hero of Long Tan's "mercy killing" upsets comrades]</ref>

Many Vietnamese participants are adamant that D Company walked into an ambush. They state that the VC had planned to draw the Australian force into a wooded area to the north of the rubber plantation, where heavy weapons had been set up on a rise known to the Australians as ''"Nui Dat 2 GR4868"''. A company of D445 Battalion were in the south near the village of Long Tan. One platoon with several rocket launchers had been placed on the south western edge of the plantation, hoping to slow down any APC-mounted reinforcements, and cut off an Australian retreat. In 2006, Sau Thu, a former major in D445 Battalion, was quoted as saying that he had been ordered to lure the Australians out of Nui Dat, kill as many of them as possible, capture their weapons and then take the base. ''We didn't know how many you had in Nui Dat. We tried to draw them out… We thought they would go one way but the Australian soldiers went the wrong way and came behind us."''

Many Vietnamese participants are adamant that D Company was ambushed. They state that the VC had planned to draw the Australian force into a wooded area to the north of the rubber plantation, where heavy weapons had been set up on a rise known to the Australians as ''"Nui Dat 2 GR4868"''. A supporting company of D445 Battalion were in the south near the village of Long Tan with one anti-tank platoonplaced on the south western edge of the plantation, hoping to slow down any APC-mounted reinforcements, and cut off an Australian retreat. In 2006, [[Sau Thu]], a former major in D445 Battalion, was quoted as saying that he had been ordered to lure the Australians out of Nui Dat, kill as many of them as possible, capture their weapons and then take the base. ''We didn't know how many you had in Nui Dat. We tried to draw them out We thought they would go one way but the Australian soldiers went the wrong way and came behind us."''

According to Burstall, the Vietnamese commander at Long Tan, Colonel Nguyen Thanh Hong, was amazed that the Australians could look on the battle as a victory:{{cquote|How can you claim a victory when you allowed yourselves to walk into a trap that we had set? Admittedly we did not finish the job, but that was only because time beat us and your reinforcements arrived. I mean you did not even attempt to follow us up. How can you claim a significant victory from that sort of behaviour?<ref>[http://www.hotkey.net.au/~marshalle/Terryb.htm Long Tan: The Other Side of the Hill]</ref>}}

According to Burstall, the Vietnamese commander at Long Tan, Colonel [[Nguyen Thanh Hong]], was amazed that the Australians could look on the battle as a victory:{{cquote|How can you claim a victory when you allowed yourselves to walk into a trap that we had set? Admittedly we did not finish the job, but that was only because time beat us and your reinforcements arrived. I mean you did not even attempt to follow us up. How can you claim a significant victory from that sort of behaviour?<ref>[http://www.hotkey.net.au/~marshalle/Terryb.htm Long Tan: The Other Side of the Hill]</ref>}}

Lieutenant-Colonel Townsend was reportedly unable to pursue the mauled 275th Regiment because of the vulnerability of the Nui Dat base to an attack from the 274th Regiment. However, seven days later the 173rd Airborne Brigade, a US marine battalion, several ARVN battalions and 5 RAR joined Operation ''Toledo'' and from 25 August to 7 September were involved in a large-scale sweep of the area. Captain Robert O'Neill (Intelligence Officer, 5 RAR) wrote that no evidence of heavy enemy casualties were found:{{cquote|...the battalion had been keyed up to the possibility of a major encounter with the Viet Cong-a battle which would have had a decisive effect on the Viet Cong in Phuoc Tuy Province. Instead all we found was dense jungle with no trace of any large Viet Cong force ever having been in the area.<ref>Robert O'Neill, Vietnam Task: The 5th Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment, 1966/67, Cassell, Melbourne, 1968, p. 93</ref>}}

Lieutenant-Colonel Townsend was reportedly unable to pursue the mauled 275th Regiment because of the vulnerability of the Nui Dat base to an attack from the 274th Regiment. However, seven days later the 173rd Airborne Brigade, a US marine battalion, several ARVN battalions and 5 RAR joined Operation ''Toledo'' and from 25 August to 7 September were involved in a large-scale sweep of the area. Captain Robert O'Neill (Intelligence Officer, 5 RAR) wrote that no evidence of heavy enemy casualties were found:{{cquote|...the battalion had been keyed up to the possibility of a major encounter with the Viet Cong-a battle which would have had a decisive effect on the Viet Cong in Phuoc Tuy Province. Instead all we found was dense jungle with no trace of any large Viet Cong force ever having been in the area.<ref>Robert O'Neill, Vietnam Task: The 5th Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment, 1966/67, Cassell, Melbourne, 1968, p. 93</ref>}}