They werent "forced to retreat"

Yes, they were. The NVA units made numerous attacks on the American perimeters over the course of 7 hours or so, and gave up / retreated because after the early shock of the ambush when US troops were caught in the open, the NVA attacks were total failures which were only getting them killed. Plus, they feared US air support, so they ran away.

Anyway, the context was that the NVA had recently besieged Plei Me and been defeated and driven back. In response, the NVA brought up reinforcements and prepared to launch a new, larger attack on Plei Me. Operation Silver Bayonet I (la Drang's LZs) was intended to disrupt and spoil this new offensive, and it was successful in doing so. The NVA units were located (LZ Albany on accident), brought into combat, defeated, and forced to flee to Cambodia instead of pressing on to attack Plei Me.

what was there to hold, a random patch of jungle around a clearing?

Irrelevant. It wasn't about holding a patch of land, it was about overrunning an American unit. The NVA units tried and failed, then ran away and got bombed during their escape. Also, since the LZ area was in the NVA units HQ area, which is how the fight happened to begin with: the American units stumbled into a large NVA force, being forced to abandon the area they had been occupying when the Americans showed up instead of driving the Americans away is another defeat.

They were supposed to be obliterated by the B-52s before this even happened

Completely different units. The B52s were heading to blow up the NVA units which had been occupying the Chu Pong Massif near LZ X-Ray. The NVA units near LZ Albany were different units. "PAVN troops in the area consisted of elements the 8th Battalion, 66th Regiment, 1st Battalion, 33rd Regiment and the headquarters of the 3rd Battalion, 33rd Regiment."

Why not? Let's say the ARVN Rangers ... ARVN Marines ... ARVN paratroopers ... American advisors are killed... and it doesn't count because reasons?

It doesn't count as a defeat of the US military, it counts as a defeat of the ARVN. The US military was much stronger than the ARVN. If the Italians were defeated in a battle in WW2, people don't bend over backwards to claim it was a German defeat, do they? Saying that the US military was defeated on the battlefield, and then pointing to ARVN units getting defeated, is highly dishonest. Why is it so psychologically important to you to believe that the US military were losers when the objective and indisputable facts flatly contradict the Narrative you want to believe?

A small group of VC Sappers blows the fuck up half of a major American airbase, but it doesn't matter, because some kind of excuse?

That never happened, though. Here is an example where the communists tried to do so in a maximum effort attack and got annihilated.

This is what the Americans thought before going to Vietnam too, but even they weren't stupid enough to repeat the same French strategy (taking Hanoi and other cities, which the French did take and held then Hanoi right to the end, and it just didn't matter).

Incorrect. The French failure was because of Dien Bien Phu, where the French intentionally put themselves in a horrible isolated position deep in enemy controlled territory with no logistics by land, thinking that they would bait the enemy into an attack. The French were overconfident that the communists would stupidly just human wave them and die instead of besieging them with artillery. The communists had a 5:1 advantage in men, and total control of the area outside the French perimeter. The French had 0 logistics except by air, and the airfield could be easily shut down by artillery.

The French ended up losing the whole base because they were idiots and bad at war & military strategy. Had the French remained close to their centers of power and logistics hubs and not gone deep into the jungle where they could be cut off, things would have been very different.

The only reason holding Hanoi "didn't matter" was that the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu immediately led the French to lose all support for the war and bow down to peace on communist terms.

And, for the record, the US would have won at Dien Bien Phu, even given the extraordinarily weak position. US air power - which France lacked - would have made easy work of the communist artillery positions through repeated strikes. Communist zig zagging trench lines, critical to their siege and unassailable by the French, would have been easy kills from the air. American soldiers are also simply superior in skill and doctrine, and would have been able to execute sallies and win at artillery duels where the French failed.

That's hilarious how some Americans can still write "Vietnam" and "easy" in the same sequence.

People like you give the NVA a mythical, magical quality that didn't exist in real life. At the end of the day, the NVA only had huge advantages because of the shackles that had been placed on the US military to fight with both hands tied behind its back. Had the US been free to fight a proper war like it had in WW2, the NVA would not have stood a chance. All that was needed was to conquer the major cities of the North and cut off supply from China. Those 2 things being done, the NVA would no longer have any resource base upon which to sustain any serious war effort.

Even with all the advantages the NVA had, it still tended to get absolutely crushed whenever it dared to fight the US out in the open. Your citation of LZ Albany was the only time where the KD ratio wasn't quite as extreme in favor of the US. The Tet Offensive resulted in the annihilation of the Viet Cong, for example. The Easter Offensive of 1972 was annihilated with heavy losses for the NVA, and the US accomplished this even after having withdrawn the vast majority of our troops.

They werent "forced to retreat"

Yes, they were. The NVA units made numerous attacks on the American perimeters over the course of 7 hours or so, and gave up / retreated because after the early shock of the ambush when US troops were caught in the open, the NVA attacks were total failures which were only getting them killed. Plus, they feared US air support, so they ran away.

Anyway, the context was that the NVA had recently besieged Plei Me and been defeated and driven back. In response, the NVA brought up reinforcements and prepared to launch a new, larger attack on Plei Me. Operation Silver Bayonet I (la Drang's LZs) was intended to disrupt and spoil this new offensive, and it was successful in doing so. The NVA units were located (LZ Albany on accident), brought into combat, defeated, and forced to flee to Cambodia instead of pressing on to attack Plei Me.

what was there to hold, a random patch of jungle around a clearing?

Irrelevant. It wasn't about holding a patch of land, it was about overrunning an American unit. The NVA units tried and failed, then ran away and got bombed during their escape. Also, since the LZ area was in the NVA units HQ area, which is how the fight happened to begin with: the American units stumbled into a large NVA force, being forced to abandon the area they had been occupying when the Americans showed up instead of driving the Americans away is another defeat.

They were supposed to be obliterated by the B-52s before this even happened

Completely different units. The B52s were heading to blow up the NVA units which had been occupying the Chu Pong Massif near LZ X-Ray. The NVA units near LZ Albany were different units. "PAVN troops in the area consisted of elements the 8th Battalion, 66th Regiment, 1st Battalion, 33rd Regiment and the headquarters of the 3rd Battalion, 33rd Regiment."

Why not? Let's say the ARVN Rangers ... ARVN Marines ... ARVN paratroopers ... American advisors are killed... and it doesn't count because reasons?

It doesn't count as a defeat of the US military, it counts as a defeat of the ARVN. The US military was much stronger than the ARVN. If the Italians were defeated in a battle in WW2, people don't bend over backwards to claim it was a German defeat, do they? Saying that the US military was defeated on the battlefield, and then pointing to ARVN units getting defeated, is highly dishonest. Why is it so psychologically important to you to believe that the US military were losers when the objective and indisputable facts flatly contradict the Narrative you want to believe?

A small group of VC Sappers blows the fuck up half of a major American airbase, but it doesn't matter, because some kind of excuse?

That never happened, though. Here is an example where the communists tried to do so in a maximum effort attack and got annihilated.

This is what the Americans thought before going to Vietnam too, but even they weren't stupid enough to repeat the same French strategy (taking Hanoi and other cities, which the French did take and held then Hanoi right to the end, and it just didn't matter).

Incorrect. The French failure was because of Dien Bien Phu, where the French intentionally put themselves in a horrible isolated position deep in enemy controlled territory with no logistics by land, thinking that they would bait the enemy into an attack. The French were overconfident that the communists would stupidly just human wave them and die instead of besieging them with artillery. The communists had a 5:1 advantage in men, and total control of the area outside the French perimeter. The French had 0 logistics except by air, and the airfield could be easily shut down by artillery.

The French ended up losing the whole base because they were idiots and bad at war & military strategy. Had the French remained close to their centers of power and logistics hubs and not gone deep into the jungle where they could be cut off, things would have been very different.

The only reason holding Hanoi "didn't matter" was that the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu immediately led the French to lose all support for the war and bow down to peace on communist terms.

And, for the record, the US would have won at Dien Bien Phu, even given the extraordinarily weak position. US air power - which France lacked - would have made easy work of the communist artillery positions through repeated strikes. Communist zig zagging trench lines, critical to their siege and unassailable by the French, would have been easy kills from the air. American soldiers are also simply superior in skill and doctrine, and would have been able to execute sallies and win at artillery duels where the French failed.

That's hilarious how some Americans can still write "Vietnam" and "easy" in the same sequence.

People like you give the NVA a mythical, magical quality that didn't exist in real life. At the end of the day, the NVA only had huge advantages because of the shackles that had been placed on the US military to fight with both hands tied behind its back. Had the US been free to fight a proper war like it had in WW2, the NVA would not have stood a chance. All that was needed was to conquer the major cities of the North and cut off supply from China. Those 2 things being done, the NVA would no longer have any resource base upon which to sustain any serious war effort.