Changes

The '''Battle of Long Tần''' was fought in a rubber plantation near the village of Long Tần, about 4 km north-east of Vung Tau, South Vietnam on August 18–19, 1966. The actual fighting lasted a few hours and came to symbolise Australia’s 10-year involvement in the Vietnam War.

The '''Battle of Long Tần''' was fought in a rubber plantation near the village of Long Tần, about 4 km north-east of Vung Tau, South Vietnam on August 18–19, 1966. The actual fighting lasted a few hours and came to symbolise Australia’s 10-year involvement in the Vietnam War.

The action occurred when D (Delta) Company of the 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (6 RAR), part of the 1st Australian Task Force (1 ATF), encountered the Viet Cong (VC) 275 Regiment and elements of the D445 Local Forces Battalion. Delta Company was supported by other Australian units, as well as New Zealand and United States personnel. According former VC Captain Le Tranh, D445 on the eve of the battle was only a small battalion with a strength of only 200 to 250 men.<ref>A Soldier Returns: A Long Tan Veteran Discovers The Other Side Of Vietnam, Terry Burstall, p. 142, University of Queensland Press, 1990 </ref>

The action occurred when D (Delta) Company of the 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (6 RAR), part of the 1st Australian Task Force (1 ATF), encountered the Viet Cong (VC) 275 Regiment and elements of the D445 Local Forces Battalion. Delta Company was supported by other Australian units, as well as New Zealand and United States personnel. According former VC Captain Le Tranh, D445 on the eve of the battle was only a small battalion with a strength of only 200 to 250 men.<ref>A Soldier Returns: A Long Tan Veteran Discovers The Other Side Of Vietnam, Terry Burstall, p. 142, University of Queensland Press, 1990</ref>

For several weeks prior to the battle, Captain Trevor Richards' 547 Signal Troop, had tracked a radio transmitter moving south but were unsure about what unit it belonged to. Aggressive patrolling failed to find this unit.

For several weeks prior to the battle, Captain Trevor Richards' 547 Signal Troop, had tracked a radio transmitter moving south but were unsure about what unit it belonged to. Aggressive patrolling failed to find this unit.

Several light mortar rounds were fired towards the company position landing to the east, most likely the same mortars that had fired at the base on the night of 16 August, causing several casualties in 103 Battery. The accompanying [[Forward Observation Officer]] (FO), New Zealand Army Captain [[Morrie Stanley]], organized counter battery fire, neutralizing them, as the mortars were not fired again. This diversion separated the main company slightly from 11 Platoon, putting the main body behind a slight rise.

Several light mortar rounds were fired towards the company position landing to the east, most likely the same mortars that had fired at the base on the night of 16 August, causing several casualties in 103 Battery. The accompanying [[Forward Observation Officer]] (FO), New Zealand Army Captain [[Morrie Stanley]], organized counter battery fire, neutralizing them, as the mortars were not fired again. This diversion separated the main company slightly from 11 Platoon, putting the main body behind a slight rise.

As 11 Platoon continued to advance they ran into a deadly ambush<ref>[https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/long-tan-behind-the-smokescreen,9369 Long Tan: Behind the smokescreen]</ref>and sustained several casualties. Following normal contact procedures, the platoon went into a defensive position. The VC formed an assault and attacked 11 Platoon around 20 minutes after initial contact with support from their heavy machine guns.

As 11 Platoon continued to advance they ran into a deadly ambush<ref>[https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/long-tan-behind-the-smokescreen,9369 Long Tan: Behind the smokescreen]</ref> and sustained several casualties. Following normal contact procedures, the platoon went into a defensive position. The VC formed an assault and attacked 11 Platoon around 20 minutes after initial contact with support from their heavy machine guns.

At 16:20 hours, Major Smith called for reinforcements by helicopter, but no ready-reaction company was on standby for operations. He was told that Alpha Company in M-113 [[Armoured Personnel Carriers]] (APCS) would be sent out to reinforce Delta Company, but they took well over an hour to move out. Smith ordered 10 Platoon to moved up to the left of 11 Platoon to relieve pressure on them and allow them to withdraw to the company defensive position out of the heavy machine gun fire. The commander of 11 Platoon, (ex-conscript) Second Lieutenant Gordon Sharp, was killed and Platoon Sergeant [[Bob Buick]] briefly assumed command of the platoon. During this engagement both forward platoons' radios went out. At this point, Lance-Corporal Barry Magnussen claims Sergeant Buick broke and ran while screaming out,''"Every man for himself!"''.<ref>[https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/long-tan-behind-the-smokescreen,9369 Long Tan: Behind the smokescreen]</ref>

At 16:20 hours, Major Smith called for reinforcements by helicopter, but no ready-reaction company was on standby for operations. He was told that Alpha Company in M-113 [[Armoured Personnel Carriers]] (APCS) would be sent out to reinforce Delta Company, but they took well over an hour to move out. Smith ordered 10 Platoon to moved up to the left of 11 Platoon to relieve pressure on them and allow them to withdraw to the company defensive position out of the heavy machine gun fire. The commander of 11 Platoon, (ex-conscript) Second Lieutenant Gordon Sharp, was killed and Platoon Sergeant [[Bob Buick]] briefly assumed command of the platoon. During this engagement both forward platoons' radios went out. At this point, Lance-Corporal Barry Magnussen claims Sergeant Buick broke and ran while screaming out,''"Every man for himself!"''.<ref>[https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/long-tan-behind-the-smokescreen,9369 Long Tan: Behind the smokescreen]</ref>

Private Trevor Atkinson of A Company, 6th Battalion helped recover the fallen of 11 Platoon:{{cquote|I can still see those 11 Platoon soldiers lying in a staright row, their weapons at the ready. Most had been shot in the back. After a while, a Delta Company officer came up and asked me what the hell I was doing. I could see he was in shock so I just quietly moved away.<ref>[https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/long-tan-behind-the-smokescreen,9369 Long Tan: Behind the smokescreen]</ref>}}

Private Trevor Atkinson of A Company, 6th Battalion helped recover the fallen of 11 Platoon:{{cquote|I can still see those 11 Platoon soldiers lying in a staright row, their weapons at the ready. Most had been shot in the back. After a while, a Delta Company officer came up and asked me what the hell I was doing. I could see he was in shock so I just quietly moved away.<ref>[https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/long-tan-behind-the-smokescreen,9369 Long Tan: Behind the smokescreen]</ref>}}

Both sides tried to evacuate the injured in the darkness, although several wounded Australians spent a long and terrifying night on the battlefield while the women and girls of the VC medical platoon (''Mrs Phuong's Medical Evacuation Unit'') moved around them. The morning light revealed the full extent of the horror. Around 50-245 (depending on the source) Viet Cong bodies were found in the battle area and it was thought that many more were removed in the night. Eighteen Australians were killed at Long Tan and 24 wounded – over one third of the initial force engaged. Another 23 Australians were killed or wounded in the preliminary VC bombardment. In all, 188 enemy killed and wounded were reported by the CO of 6th RAR in his initial report on 19 August.<ref>"Enemy casualties [were] 188 and 3 Viet Cong captured". (See 6th RAR War Diary, available online)</ref>The platoon under Second Lieutenant Eric Andrews reported a body count of about fifty killed on 20 August.<ref>"50 enemy bodies buried in [D] company location." (6th RAR War Diary, available online)</ref>The Vietnamese on their part have conceded 30 dead and 60 wounded in the 275th Regiment.<ref>Long Tan and Beyond: Alpha Company 6 RAR in Vietnam 1966-67, Charles S. Mollison, Page 133, Cobb's Crossing Publications, 2006</ref>Around 12 VC were killed in the D445 company that took part in the battle.  

Both sides tried to evacuate the injured in the darkness, although several wounded Australians spent a long and terrifying night on the battlefield while the women and girls of the VC medical platoon (''Mrs Phuong's Medical Evacuation Unit'') moved around them. The morning light revealed the full extent of the horror. Around 50-245 (depending on the source) Viet Cong bodies were found in the battle area and it was thought that many more were removed in the night. Eighteen Australians were killed at Long Tan and 24 wounded – over one third of the initial force engaged. Another 23 Australians were killed or wounded in the preliminary VC bombardment. In all, 188 enemy killed and wounded were reported by the CO of 6th RAR in his initial report on 19 August.<ref>"Enemy casualties [were] 188 and 3 Viet Cong captured". (See 6th RAR War Diary, available online)</ref> The platoon under Second Lieutenant Eric Andrews reported a body count of about fifty killed on 20 August.<ref>"50 enemy bodies buried in [D] company location." (6th RAR War Diary, available online)</ref> The Vietnamese on their part have conceded 30 dead and 60 wounded in the 275th Regiment.<ref>Long Tan and Beyond: Alpha Company 6 RAR in Vietnam 1966-67, Charles S. Mollison, Page 133, Cobb's Crossing Publications, 2006</ref> Around 12 VC were killed in the D445 company that took part in the battle.  

The official Australian Army history ''To Long Tan'', by the Australian military historian Ian McNeill, lists the number of Vietnamese killed in action as 245 and three enemy captured. However, new research shows that the Australian claim of 245 enemy soldiers killed in the battle to be a highly inflated body-count.<ref>''"The VC divisional planners estimated that four to six labourers would be needed for every wounded soldier requiring evacuation. A 30 percent casualty rate at Long Tan would mean a force of 1,200 would take 360 casualties. Using an 80:20 split for the casualties, 288 would be wounded and 72 killed. To get the seriously wounded and dead off the field, a labour force of something like 800 would be needed. If the casualty figures were increased to 245 dead, the wounded would be 980. Under the 30 per cent rule that would mean an attacking force of just over 4,000, plus a clearance labour force of 3,500. These are unimaginable numbers ..."'' (Vietnam: The Complete Story Of The Australian War,  Bruce Davies,  Gary McKay,  Allen & Unwin, 2013)</ref>

The official Australian Army history ''To Long Tan'', by the Australian military historian Ian McNeill, lists the number of Vietnamese killed in action as 245 and three enemy captured. However, new research shows that the Australian claim of 245 enemy soldiers killed in the battle to be a highly inflated body-count.<ref>''"The VC divisional planners estimated that four to six labourers would be needed for every wounded soldier requiring evacuation. A 30 percent casualty rate at Long Tan would mean a force of 1,200 would take 360 casualties. Using an 80:20 split for the casualties, 288 would be wounded and 72 killed. To get the seriously wounded and dead off the field, a labour force of something like 800 would be needed. If the casualty figures were increased to 245 dead, the wounded would be 980. Under the 30 per cent rule that would mean an attacking force of just over 4,000, plus a clearance labour force of 3,500. These are unimaginable numbers ..."'' (Vietnam: The Complete Story Of The Australian War,  Bruce Davies,  Gary McKay,  Allen & Unwin, 2013)</ref>

Both the Vietnamese and Australian militaries have disputed each other’s version. The first North Vietnamese communiqué claimed that: ''"Liberation Fighters ... wiped out almost completely one Battalion of the Australian Mercenaries in an ambush in the Long Tan Village."''

Both the Vietnamese and Australian militaries have disputed each other’s version. The first North Vietnamese communiqué claimed that: ''"Liberation Fighters ... wiped out almost completely one Battalion of the Australian Mercenaries in an ambush in the Long Tan Village."''

There have also been accusations that the Australians also exaggerated enemy casualties. Casualty figures for the Viet Cong ranged from the 245 reportedly found dead on the field of action to the often quoted American Intelligence Officer's high count of 800 Vietnamese killed,<ref>Vietnam – The Australian War, Paul Ham, p 245 and p 704, HarperCollins 2007</ref>with some 6th RAR veterans<ref>[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/helicopter-pilot-cliff-dohle-cited-for-gallantry-in-mission-to-resupply-long-tan-diggers/story-e6frg6nf-1225792091865 Helicopter pilot Cliff Dohle cited for gallantry in mission to resupply Long Tan diggers, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/...]</ref>accepting the reinforced 275th Regiment's count (including D445 losses) of 47 killed (including D445 KIA) and one-hundred wounded. Australian Military Historians [[Bruce Davies]] and [[Gary McKay]] say claims citing the US Army Intelligence Officer's record purportedly showing that 800 Vietnamese were killed in the battle are wrong for the report does not exist.<ref>"Unfortunately, the diary or parts of it have never been produced. It is also difficult to understand why such an important document was not sent to the combined Document Exploitaton Centre, from where translated copies would have been despatched to all intelligence commanders." (Vietnam: The Complete Story Of The Australian War, Bruce Davies,  Gary McKay,  Allen & Unwin, 2013)</ref>

There have also been accusations that the Australians also exaggerated enemy casualties. Casualty figures for the Viet Cong ranged from the 245 reportedly found dead on the field of action to the often quoted American Intelligence Officer's high count of 800 Vietnamese killed,<ref>Vietnam – The Australian War, Paul Ham, p 245 and p 704, HarperCollins 2007</ref> with some 6th RAR veterans<ref>[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/helicopter-pilot-cliff-dohle-cited-for-gallantry-in-mission-to-resupply-long-tan-diggers/story-e6frg6nf-1225792091865 Helicopter pilot Cliff Dohle cited for gallantry in mission to resupply Long Tan diggers, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/...]</ref> accepting the reinforced 275th Regiment's count (including D445 losses) of 47 killed (including D445 KIA) and one-hundred wounded. Australian Military Historians [[Bruce Davies]] and [[Gary McKay]] say claims citing the US Army Intelligence Officer's record purportedly showing that 800 Vietnamese were killed in the battle are wrong for the report does not exist.<ref>"Unfortunately, the diary or parts of it have never been produced. It is also difficult to understand why such an important document was not sent to the combined Document Exploitaton Centre, from where translated copies would have been despatched to all intelligence commanders." (Vietnam: The Complete Story Of The Australian War, Bruce Davies,  Gary McKay,  Allen & Unwin, 2013)</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>}}

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 more recent Australian embellished claims that 2,500-3,000<ref>[https://www.awm.gov.au/about/our-work/publications/wartime/35/article Wartime Issue 35 - No time for fear]</ref>Vietnamese were involved in the battle with D Company is not supported by all Australian veterans. 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 embellished claims that 2,500-3,000<ref>[https://www.awm.gov.au/about/our-work/publications/wartime/35/article Wartime Issue 35 - No time for fear]</ref> Vietnamese were involved in the battle with D Company is not supported by all Australian veterans. 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 captured VC wounded 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 criticized 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>

Vietnam veterans have also reported that Australian soldiers shot or bayoneted captured VC wounded 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 criticized 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>

In 2013, [[Phan Chien]], chairman of the [[Ba Ria-Vung Tau Veterans' Association]], reported that the VC forces suffered over 170 killed from 1966 until 1971 in Phouc Tuy Province, which appeared to confirm Australian estimates over enemy numbers killed in the Battle of Long Tan.

In 2013, [[Phan Chien]], chairman of the [[Ba Ria-Vung Tau Veterans' Association]], reported that the VC forces suffered over 170 killed from 1966 until 1971 in Phouc Tuy Province, which appeared to confirm Australian estimates over enemy numbers killed in the Battle of Long Tan.

In 2015, Harry Smith pointed out that some had come to compare the Australian stand at Long Tan with the [[Battle of Rorke's Drift]], when 170 British soldiers held off 3,000 Zulus.<ref>[http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4086943/long-tan-pride/ Australian Vietnam vets have come a long way since the Battle of Long Tan 50 years ago</ref>

In 2015, Harry Smith pointed out that some had come to compare the Australian stand at Long Tan with the [[Battle of Rorke's Drift]], when 170 British soldiers held off 3,000 Zulus.<ref>[http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4086943/long-tan-pride/ Australian Vietnam vets have come a long way since the Battle of Long Tan 50 years ago]</ref>

On 17 August 2016, the Australian government was informed that Vietnam would not allow about 1,000 veterans from Australia and New Zealand to visit Long Tan for the 50th Anniversary of the battle. A personal appeal by Prime Minister [[Malcolm Turnbull]] of Australia to his Vietnamese counterpart, Nguyen Xuan Phuc, led Vietnam to reverse its earlier decision. The next day, Vietnam allowed supervised groups of 100 people to visit the Long Tan battle site.

On 17 August 2016, the Australian government was informed that Vietnam would not allow about 1,000 veterans from Australia and New Zealand to visit Long Tan for the 50th Anniversary of the battle. A personal appeal by Prime Minister [[Malcolm Turnbull]] of Australia to his Vietnamese counterpart, Nguyen Xuan Phuc, led Vietnam to reverse its earlier decision. The next day, Vietnam allowed supervised groups of 100 people to visit the Long Tan battle site.