If you served in Vietnam, or if you know someone who did, the stories you heard probably didn’t include what might have been the most divisive issue troops faced. Not just the enemy in front of them, but the prejudice within their own ranks. Today, we’re confronting one of the least discussed aspects of the Vietnam War.

 The racial tensions that nearly tore American units apart from the inside. This isn’t speculation or revisionist history. This is documented in military investigations, congressional hearings, and the testimonies of thousands of veterans who lived through it. Let’s start with something most Americans don’t know. Black soldiers made up a disproportionate percentage of combat deaths, especially in the early years of the war.

 In 1965, when major American ground combat operations began, African-Ameans comprised roughly 11% of the US population. But according to Department of Defense casualty statistics, black soldiers accounted for nearly 25% of Army combat deaths that year. That’s not a small statistical variance. That’s more than double their representation in the population dying in combat.

 By 1966, the disparity was even worse in some units. Marine Corps data showed that in certain infantry companies, black Marines were dying at rates approaching 30% of total casualties despite making up only 12 to 13% of Marine Corps personnel. The numbers weren’t accidental. They resulted from systematic patterns in how black soldiers were assigned, promoted, and utilized in combat.

 Black soldiers were disproportionately assigned to frontline combat units rather than support or technical positions. Military occupational specialty assignment records show clear patterns. A 1971 study by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People examining military assignment patterns found that black soldiers were significantly over represented in infantry, armor, and other direct combat roles while under reppresented in administrative, technical, and skilled positions.

 The reasons were multiple and interconnected. Many black draftes came from educational backgrounds that the military’s testing systems deemed inadequate for technical training. The armed forces qualification test which determined job assignments was criticized even at the time for cultural bias that disadvantaged black test takers.

 Wallace Terry, a black journalist who covered Vietnam extensively and later compiled the oral history collection Bloods and Oral History of the Vietnam War by black veterans, documented this pattern repeatedly. One soldier he interviewed stated directly, “They didn’t think we were smart enough for the technical jobs, so they put us in the infantry, where all you needed to do was carry a rifle and follow orders.

” Black soldiers faced significant barriers to promotion which kept them in lower enlisted ranks where combat exposure was highest. According to Department of Defense personnel records from the Vietnam era, black servicemen were significantly underrepresented in the NCO ranks and virtually absent in the officer corps during the early and middle years of the war.

 In 1968, at the height of American involvement, black officers made up less than 3% of the Army’s officer corps and less than 1% of the Marine Corps officer ranks. This despite black soldiers comprising 12 to 13% of enlisted personnel. The lack of black officers and senior NCOs meant fewer advocates in the command structure and fewer role models for black enlisted men.

 It also meant that decisions about who went on the most dangerous patrols, who walked point, and who got assigned to high-risk missions were being made almost exclusively by white leadership. Multiple veteran accounts and unit records indicate that black soldiers were disproportionately assigned to Walk Point, the most dangerous position in any patrol.

 Bloods contains numerous accounts of this. One Marine, Specialist 4, Richard Ford, described it bluntly in his interview. It seemed like the brothers always got point. White guys would sometimes walk it, but if you looked at who was getting killed walking point, it was mostly black guys. Point men had casualty rates three to four times higher than soldiers in other positions.

 Being consistently assigned to this position wasn’t random chance. It was a death sentence that fell disproportionately on black soldiers. Another veteran, Marine Corps Sergeant Haywood T. Kirkland, told Terry, “I walked point for 9 months.” Nine months. Every single patrol they’d put me up front. When I asked why, the lieutenant said I was good at it.

 What he meant was I was expendable. The casualty disparity was made worse by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamera’s project 100,000 initiated in 1966. The project lowered military entrance standards ostensibly to give underprivileged young men opportunities for training and advancement. In reality, it funneled tens of thousands of poorly educated, disproportionately black and poor men into the military and straight into combat.

 According to military records analyzed by historian Christian Ay in his book Workingclass War: American Combat Soldiers in Vietnam, approximately 40% of Project 100,000 recruits were black, despite African-Ameans comprising only 11% of the eligible population. These men, categorized as new standards men, received abbreviated training and were overwhelmingly assigned to combat arms rather than technical positions.

 Their death rate in Vietnam was double that of other servicemen. Project 100,000 brought 354,000 men into the military between 1966 and 1971. An estimated 5,478 of them died in Vietnam, a death rate significantly higher than the general military population. One Project 100,000 recruit speaking to researchers years later described his experience.

 They gave us a few weeks of basic training, handed us rifles, and shipped us to Vietnam. Most of the guys in my unit were Project 100,000. Most of them were black or poor white kids from the south, and most of them didn’t come home. The disparity in black combat deaths became too obvious to ignore. Civil rights leaders, including Martin Luther King Jr.

, began publicly criticizing the war partly because of the disproportionate black casualties. In his 1967 speech, Beyond Vietnam, a time to break silence, delivered at Riverside Church in New York, King stated, “We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society, and sending them 8,000 m away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia, which they had not found in Southwest Georgia and East Harlem.

” The military responded to public pressure by adjusting assignment policies. By 1968 to 1969, the percentage of black combat deaths had decreased to roughly 14 to 15%, closer to their overall representation in the military. But the damage was done. Thousands of black soldiers had already died in disproportionate numbers, and the racial tensions their deaths created within the military were reaching a breaking point.

The second major issue was the open display of Confederate flags and racist symbols on American military bases and in combat zones. Black soldiers in Vietnam faced constant reminders that many of their white comrades viewed them as inferior. Confederate battle flags flew over hooches, appeared on helmets, and decorated vehicles throughout Vietnam.

 Military investigation reports from the late 1960s document widespread display of Confederate flags in barracks and on military installations both in Vietnam and stateside. The Department of Defense’s 1969 investigation into racial tensions prompted by increasing incidents of racial violence found Confederate flags displayed in numerous barracks, mesh halls, and recreation areas on bases both in Vietnam and stateside.

 One investigation report from Camp Lejun, North Carolina, noted that Confederate flags were prominently displayed in multiple barracks and that black marines had filed formal complaints about the flags, creating a hostile environment. In Vietnam, the situation was even more blatant. Unit areas, especially in rear areas where permanent structures existed, often featured Confederate flags alongside or instead of American flags.

Specialist Ford Don Brown, a black soldier whose account appears in Terry’s Bloods, described arriving at his unit in Vietnam. The first thing I saw when I got to the company area was a Confederate flag flying from the communications tent. Not the American flag, the Confederate flag. That told me everything I needed to know about what I was walking into.

 Soldiers personalized their equipment. And for many white soldiers from the south, that meant Confederate imagery. Photographs from Vietnam, now preserved in military archives and museums, show numerous instances of soldiers with Confederate flags painted on their helmets, flack jackets, and even gun barrels. Black soldiers found themselves fighting alongside men who openly displayed symbols of slavery and racial oppression.

 The psychological impact was profound. Marine Corporal Regginald Edwards, interviewed for Tererry’s book, described the tension. You’d be in a firefight, and the guy next to you has a Confederate flag on his helmet. You’re supposed to trust this guy with your life, but he’s wearing the symbol of people who wanted to keep your ancestors enslaved.

 How do you process that? The military command’s response to complaints about Confederate symbols was inconsistent at best and dismissive at worst. Some commanders issued orders banning Confederate flags, recognizing them as divisive and damaging to unit cohesion. Others refused to act, claiming the flags were expressions of heritage or that banning them would infringe on soldiers freedom of expression.

 A 1969 Marine Corps directive attempted to address the issue by prohibiting displays which are contrary to good order and discipline, but enforcement varied wildly between units and commanders. One black NCO interviewed for the Department of Defense’s racial tension investigation stated, “I reported the Confederate flags to my company commander three times. Each time he said he’d handle it.

Nothing ever changed. The flag stayed up. The message was clear. Black Marines concerns didn’t matter. Black soldiers found themselves in an impossible psychological position, fighting for American ideals of freedom and democracy while their white comrades celebrated symbols of slavery and racial subjugation.

This paradox appears repeatedly in veteran testimonies. They were dying at disproportionate rates for a country that didn’t fully recognize them as equal citizens alongside men who sometimes made their racial hatred explicit. Private First Class Herald Bryant, whose account appears in Bloods, captured this contradiction.

 We’re supposed to be fighting for freedom and democracy, right? That’s what they told us. But I’m fighting next to guys who think I’m less than human because of my skin color. I’m risking my life for a country that still has segregated schools and won’t let my father vote. Where’s the freedom in that? The third major manifestation of racial tension centered on the DAP, an elaborate handshake ritual that black soldiers developed as a form of cultural expression and solidarity.

 The DAP became a flash point for racial conflict with white commanders viewing it as a threat to discipline and black soldiers viewing it as an essential expression of identity and brotherhood. The rituals evolved in Vietnam as black soldiers created increasingly elaborate greeting rituals. What started as simple handshakes developed into complex sequences involving multiple hand positions, finger snaps, and choreographed movements.

 According to cultural historians who’ve studied the phenomenon, the DAP served multiple purposes for black soldiers. It was cultural expression in an environment that often felt hostile to black identity. It was solidarity, a way of acknowledging shared experience and mutual support. And it was resistance, a refusal to completely conform to a military culture that often marginalized black servicemen.

 The rituals could last anywhere from a few seconds to several minutes for the most elaborate versions. They varied by unit, region, and individual creativity. Military commanders, particularly white officers, viewed the DAP with suspicion and hostility. Department of Defense reports from 1968 to 1971 document numerous commanders who believed the DAP was a sign of black militancy, gang activity, or refusal to accept military discipline.

 Some commanders issued direct orders forbidding the DAP, classifying it as a violation of military courtesy or as conduct prejuditial to good order and discipline. These orders led to disciplinary actions, including article 15s for soldiers caught performing the greeting. A 1970 Army investigation into racial tensions at Fort Hood, Texas, found that restrictions on the DAP were one of the primary grievances cited by black soldiers.

 The report noted that white commanders inability to understand the cultural significance of the DAP exacerbated racial divisions. One black sergeant interviewed for the investigation stated, “They let white soldiers do all kinds of informal greetings and relaxed behavior when they’re off duty. But when brothers dap each other up, suddenly it’s a threat to military discipline.

 It’s just another way of telling us our culture isn’t acceptable.” Black soldiers pointed out that white soldiers engaged in similar informal behavior without facing discipline. White soldiers had their own informal greetings, used casual language with each other, and engaged in various customs and rituals that technically violated military formality.

 But these behaviors rarely drew official sanction. The selective enforcement around the DAP highlighted broader double standards in military discipline. Behaviors that were overlooked when white soldiers engaged in them became punishable offenses when black soldiers did the same. Specialist 5, Emmanuel H.

 Hollowerman, interviewed for Tererry’s Bloods, described the disparity. White guys would slap each other on the back, rough house, call each other all kinds of nicknames, and nobody said anything. We’d dAP, and officers would come down on us for not maintaining military bearing. It was harassment, plain and simple. Disputes over the DAP sometimes escalated to physical violence.

 Military police reports and criminal investigation files document incidents where attempts to stop black soldiers from performing the DAP led to confrontations and sometimes to full-scale brawls between black and white servicemen. A 1968 incident at Long Bin Jail, the main American military prison in Vietnam, began when guards attempted to prevent black inmates from performing the dab.

 The confrontation escalated into a riot that required intervention from military police with riot gear. Similar incidents occurred on ships at rear area bases and even occasionally in combat zones. The DAP became a symbol of broader racial tensions, an issue that might seem minor, but represented fundamental questions about respect, cultural expression, and equal treatment.

 The fourth issue was racial violence within American units, including the terrifying phenomenon of fragging, the assassination of unpopular officers or NCOs, often with fragmentation grenades. While fragging incidents occurred for various reasons, racial tensions were a significant factor in many cases. According to Department of Defense records, there were approximately 800 documented fragging incidents in Vietnam between 1969 and 1972.

The actual number was likely higher as some incidents went unreported or were classified as accidents. Congressional testimony from 1971 hearings on military discipline indicated that at least 20% of fragging incidents had clear racial components. either black soldiers targeting white leaders they viewed as racist or white soldiers targeting black NCOs or officers.

 The weapons used varied. Fragmentation grenades were common because they were readily available left minimal evidence and their fragmentation pattern made it difficult to determine trajectory and origin. But firearms, explosives, and other means were also used. Court marshall records and investigation files reveal cases where racial hatred was the explicit motive for violence.

 A 1970 incident at Camp Eagle involved three white soldiers who attempted to kill a black sergeant with a grenade. Investigation transcripts showed the attackers had repeatedly used racial slurs against the sergeant and had stated they didn’t want to take orders from him because of his race. Conversely, cases existed where black soldiers fragged white officers who they believed were deliberately assigning them to dangerous missions or treating them unfairly because of their race.

 One court marshal from 1969 documented in military legal records involved two black soldiers charged with attempted murder of their platoon leader. Testimony revealed the lieutenant had consistently used racial epithets, made comments about black soldiers being naturally better at following orders than thinking, and had assigned point duty almost exclusively to the unit’s black members.

 The soldiers were convicted, but the case led to the removal of the lieutenant from command and a broader investigation into racial discrimination in the battalion. Beyond targeted violence, mass racial brawls occurred with increasing frequency as the war progressed. The most famous incident was the 1968 riot at Long Bin Jail mentioned earlier.

 Over 200 inmates, predominantly black, rioted after a confrontation over the DAP and other grievances. The riot lasted several hours and required significant military police intervention to suppress. Similar incidents occurred at Camp Leune, North Carolina in 1969 with a massive brawl between black and white Marines that injured dozens.

 The USS Kittyhawk saw a racial riot in 1972 aboard the aircraft carrier that injured 46 sailors and resulted in multiple court marshals. Travis Air Force Base in 1971 experienced confrontations between black and white airmen that led to lockdowns and investigations. These weren’t isolated incidents by a few troublemakers.

 Military reports from the era describe a pattern of racial violence that threatened the basic functioning of units. Combat units depend on trust and cohesion. Soldiers need to believe their comrades will protect them, that their leaders will make fair decisions and that everyone is working toward the same goal. Racial violence shattered that cohesion in many units.

 Testimony from officers and senior NCOs during the 1971 congressional hearings on military discipline painted a disturbing picture. Some units had effectively self-segregated with black and white soldiers maintaining separate areas in barracks, separate tables in mesh halls, and minimal interaction outside of duty requirements.

 One commander testified, “I had two separate groups of soldiers, black and white. They barely spoke to each other. They sat on opposite sides of the messaul. Off duty, they went to different clubs and different parts of town. When we went to the field, I had to carefully manage assignments to prevent confrontations. The level of trust required for effective combat operations simply did not exist.

 The military’s response to racial violence was often inadequate and sometimes made things worse. Some commanders attempted to address root causes, implementing equal opportunity programs, punishing racist behavior, and creating channels for black soldiers to voice grievances. But many commanders simply cracked down on symptoms without addressing causes.

Increased discipline, more restrictions, and mass punishments often fell disproportionately to black soldiers, reinforcing their sense that the system was stacked against them. A Department of Defense task force report from 1971 concluded that the military had failed to adequately address racial tensions and that many commanders lacked understanding of the legitimate grievances of black servicemen.

 The report recommended sweeping changes including mandatory equal opportunity training, diversification of the officer corps, prohibition of racist symbols, and establishment of formal grievance procedures. Implementation was slow and uneven. The fifth major issue was the stark disparity in how the military justice system treated black and white soldiers.

 Statistics, court marshal records, and investigations reveal a pattern of discriminatory enforcement and sentencing that devastated black servicemen and further inflamed racial tensions. Black soldiers were arrested and charged with disciplinary violations at rates far exceeding their percentage of military personnel. A 1971 NAACP study of military justice in Vietnam found that black soldiers comprised approximately 12% of military personnel, but accounted for 25% of court marshals, 34% of soldiers confined to military prisons and 45% of soldiers in maximum

security military prisons. The disparities weren’t because black soldiers committed more crimes. analysis showed they were arrested and charged for behaviors that white soldiers engaged in with less consequence. Non-judicial punishment under article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice was applied far more frequently to black soldiers.

 Article 15 allows commanders to impose punishment for minor offenses without court marshal. It’s discretionary. Commanders decide whether to use article 15 or handle issues through counseling or other means. Department of Defense records analyzed by congressional investigators showed that black soldiers received article 15 punishment at rates significantly higher than white soldiers, even controlling for rank and time in service.

 The offenses were often subjective. disrespect toward a superior officer, failure to obey a lawful order, conduct unbecoming. These charges gave commanders wide discretion, and that discretion was often applied along racial lines. One study of article 15s in a division operating in Vietnam found that black soldiers were three times more likely to receive article 15 punishment for disrespect than white soldiers despite no evidence that black soldiers engaged in disrespectful behavior more frequently.

 When cases went to court marshall, black soldiers received harsher sentences than white soldiers for comparable offenses. Congressional testimony from 1971 included analysis of court marshal records showing significant sentencing disparities. For unauthorized absence, black soldiers received average sentences 40% longer than white soldiers.

 For assault charges, black soldiers were convicted at higher rates and received sentences averaging 50% longer. For drug offenses, black soldiers faced court marshal more often than white soldiers and received significantly harsher punishment. These weren’t marginal differences. They represented systematic bias that sent black soldiers to military prisons at far higher rates and for far longer sentences.

 The long bin jail became known as the LBJ, a sardonic reference both to its initials and to President Lynden B. Johnson, under whose administration the war escalated. By 1968 to 1969, approximately 60 to 70% of inmates at Long Bin jail were black, despite black soldiers comprising only about 12% of troops in Vietnam. Conditions in military prisons were harsh, and black inmates reported systematic mistreatment.

 The 1968 riot at Long Bin was sparked partly by these conditions and partly by guards attempts to prevent cultural expressions like the DAP. Prison staff were predominantly white. Discipline was often brutal. Black inmates described the experience as being treated like they were back in the Jim Crow South. Facing discriminatory treatment and racial harassment, some black soldiers chose desertion.

 Desertion statistics show that while black soldiers deserted at slightly lower rates than white soldiers early in the war, their desertion rates increased significantly after 1968 as racial tensions peaked. Some deserters fled to Sweden, Canada, or other countries. Others simply disappeared into cities in Vietnam or neighboring countries.

 A few joined anti-war movements in exile. Terry’s Bloods includes the account of a soldier who came close to deserting. I thought about it every day just walking away, going to Cambodia or Laos or somewhere they couldn’t find me. The only reason I didn’t was I knew what it would do to my family back home. But I understood why brothers who did desert made that choice.

 Sometimes it felt like the enemy in front of us was less dangerous than the racism behind us. Black soldiers lacked adequate legal representation in court marshal proceedings. Military defense council were assigned, but these lawyers were often overworked, inexperienced, and sometimes shared the racial prejudices of the prosecutors and court marshal board members.

Organizations like the NAACP and the Lawyers Military Defense Committee attempted to provide assistance, but their resources were limited. Most black soldiers facing court marshal did so without effective advocacy. The conviction rates reflected this disparity. Court marshals with predominantly white board members convicted black defendants at higher rates than white defendants, even when evidence and circumstances were similar.

The military justice disparities had consequences that extended far beyond Vietnam. A less than honorable discharge, which black soldiers received at disproportionate rates, meant loss of veterans benefits, difficulty finding employment, and social stigma that followed men for the rest of their lives.

 Veterans with bad conduct discharges or dishonorable discharges lost access to GI Bill educational benefits, VA home loans, veterans health care, and veterans hiring preferences. These were the same benefits that had helped lift millions of white veterans into the middle class after World War II. Black Vietnam veterans punished disproportionately by a discriminatory military justice system were denied these opportunities.

 The generational impact was significant. While white Vietnam veterans could use VA benefits to buy homes and get educations, many black Vietnam veterans returned to poverty, unable to access the programs that might have changed their lives. The racism black soldiers faced in Vietnam existed within a complex context that’s important to understand.

 Many units functioned effectively despite racial tensions. Numerous accounts exist of black and white soldiers forming genuine friendships, protecting each other in combat, and maintaining professional relationships despite the broader social divisions. Combat sometimes created bonds that transcended race. In firefights, soldiers depended on each other for survival, regardless of skin color.

 Some veterans report that racial divisions were less pronounced in combat units than in rear areas, though even this varied significantly by unit and leadership. Vietnamese civilians and fighters sometimes exploited or commented on American racial divisions. The North Vietnamese and Vietkong produced propaganda specifically targeting black soldiers, pointing out the hypocrisy of fighting for freedom in Vietnam while facing oppression at home.

Leaflets and radio broadcasts aimed at black troops used slogans pointing out the contradiction of their service. Some black soldiers reported that Vietnamese civilians treated them differently than white soldiers, sometimes with more respect or friendliness. Whether this was genuine or tactical varied by individual and situation.

The Vietnam War occurred during the height of the civil rights movement and these struggles were inseparable. Black soldiers in Vietnam were aware of what was happening at home. The marches, the assassinations of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, the riots in American cities.

 They saw themselves as fighting abroad while their communities fought for basic rights at home. When King was assassinated in April 1968, military bases erupted. Black soldiers mourned, demonstrated, and in some cases rioted. Many questioned why they were fighting in Vietnam when the struggle for justice was happening in America.

 One Marine, quoted in Terry’s Bloods, described hearing about King’s death. When we heard King was killed, everything changed. Brothers were openly questioning why we were here. Some threw down their weapons and refused to go to the field. The officers didn’t know what to do. For a few days, it felt like the whole military might fall apart.

 The racism in Vietnam wasn’t about individual bad actors. It was systemic, built into assignment policies, promotion criteria, justice procedures, and command attitudes. well-meaning individuals couldn’t overcome systems designed to produce discriminatory outcomes. Even black officers, the few who existed, often found themselves unable to protect black enlisting men from biased treatment.

 The military was a reflection of American society, the segregation that had only recently been challenged at home, the prejudices that permeated civilian life, the institutional barriers that limited black advancement. All of these existed in the military as well. The racial crisis in the military during Vietnam eventually forced changes.

 In 1971, the Department of Defense established the Defense Race Relations Institute to train equal opportunity advisers. Mandatory race relations training was implemented throughout the military. Regulations were strengthened against discriminatory behavior. The display of Confederate flags and other divisive symbols was officially prohibited.

Promotion and assignment procedures were reviewed and reformed. The officer corps slowly diversified. By the end of the 1970s, the percentage of black officers had increased significantly, though it still didn’t match the percentage of black enlisted personnel. Black Vietnam veterans returned to an America that was often hostile or indifferent.

 They faced racism at home from civilians who didn’t want them in their neighborhoods or businesses. They faced hostility from anti-war protesters who saw them as tools of an unjust war. They faced discrimination in employment, housing, and access to services. And they faced particular struggles within the veterans community.

 Traditional veterans organizations like the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars had historically excluded or segregated black members. While this was changing by the 1970s, many black Vietnam veterans didn’t feel welcome. The psychological toll was immense. Black Vietnam veterans had PTSD rates higher than white veterans.

 They had higher rates of homelessness, unemployment, and incarceration. The combination of combat trauma and racial trauma created burdens that many struggled with for decades. For too long, the narrative of the Vietnam War marginalized or excluded black veterans experiences. The popular image of the Vietnam veteran shaped by movies, books, and media was often a white soldier.

 The particular struggles black veterans faced were rarely discussed in mainstream accounts of the war. Books like Wallace Terry’s Bloods, published in 1984, began to change this. Oral history projects, academic studies, and documentaries have gradually brought black veterans experiences into the historical record, but many stories remain untold.

 Thousands of black Vietnam veterans never spoke publicly about their experiences. They carried their trauma privately, dealing with the compound effects of combat and racism without acknowledgement or support. The five aspects covered here, disproportionate casualties, Confederate flags, cultural conflict over the DAP, racial violence, including fragging, and justice system disparities, represent the clearest documented evidence of how racism shaped the Vietnam War experience.

 But they don’t capture everything. They don’t fully convey the daily indignities, the constant low-level harassment, the psychological weight of serving a country that didn’t fully accept you as equal. Black soldiers in Vietnam fought two wars, one against the Vietkong and North Vietnamese army and one against racism within their own military.

 The first war ended in 1973. For many veterans, the second war never truly ended. Understanding this history is essential for several reasons. First, it honors the service and sacrifice of black Vietnam veterans who faced challenges that went far beyond combat. Second, it provides crucial context for understanding the Vietnam War itself.

You can’t fully comprehend why the American military struggled in Vietnam without understanding the internal divisions that undermined unit cohesion and morale. Third, it offers lessons for today’s military. While significant progress has been made, issues of racial equity in military justice, promotion, and assignment remain subjects of ongoing concern and study.

 The sources for this video are extensive. Department of Defense reports, congressional hearings, court marshall records, academic studies, and most importantly, the firsthand accounts of veterans themselves. Wallace Terry’s Bloods is essential reading, as is James West Hiders fighting on two fronts: African-Americans and the Vietnam War.

If you’re a black Vietnam veteran, your experiences matter and deserve to be heard. The comment section is open if you want to share your story. For everyone else, understanding this history means recognizing that the Vietnam War was not the unified American experience. Black soldiers faced particular challenges that deserve acknowledgement and respect.

 Remember these stories. Share this video.