Was operation rolling thunder a success or a failure?

Answer 1

A success in that US airpower (Air Force, Navy, and Marine) were able to test their aircraft (F100, F101, F102, F104, F105, F4, F8, A1, A4, A6, A7, U2, SR71, B57, B52, etc.), tactics, and strategy. Experience that would pay off during next bombing campaigns. A failure in that the war continued on.

Answer 2

Rolling Thunder failed in that it didn't break the will of the North Vietnamese. It succeeded in that it taught US air units how to fight modern jet warfare (Top Gun and Red Flag are products of the air war over North Vietnam).

"Most" historians, retired military men, and television (Military Channel/History Channel) will tell you that Rolling Thunder failed because it didn't hit the enemy hard in the right places. These same people will state that Linebacker II (aka the Christmas Bombings) succeeded because it did hit the correct targets and hit them hard!

"Most" historians, retired military men, and television will CONVENIENTLY leave out the part about Hanoi KNOWING that the US was re-deploying (leaving) from South Vietnam anyway; and that the objective of North Vietnam had always been, and was during Linebacker II, for the US to be gone from Vietnam. It is true that the North went back to the peace tables after Linebacker II, but it's also true that Linebacker II coincided with the US re-deployment from South Vietnam.

Another words, had Rolling Thunder been conducted as Linebacker II was conducted, and the US was staying in South Vietnam; then the North would simply have escalated their defenses against the new threat...just like they've always done (thru-out the whole war).

Bottom line: It all goes back to the original mission; winning the war. Invading North Vietnam or deploying atomic weapons. Neither of which were options (contingency plans existed for both however).