The American public begged for a way out, a light of hope to end the Vietnam War. Protesters lined the streets to proclaim how desperately they wanted soldiers back home. The government spent a huge amount of money, and many soldiers fought for their lives daily in battle. In the midst of the worst part of the war, a man named Richard Nixon came forth to stand as America’s light of hope. “Vietnamization” was Nixon’s ticket into the Oval Office, however; the implementation of his policy and the outcome of the war displeased some Americans.
Nixon noticed that America had drawn close to opening the door to the longest war involvement in American history, so he took advantage of it. Nixon announced to the American public that he had a plan to get them out of the Vietnam War. Nixon’s plan was to get U.S. troops out of Vietnam, and replace them with ARVN (South Vietnam troops). This policy was named Vietnamization and was the main reason Richard Nixon became president. Nixon happened to gain office when the war was at its worst. “I have chosen a plan for peace,” Nixon says to the public a...
The Vietnam War, which lasted for two decades (1955-1975), was probably the most problematic of all American wars. US involvement in Vietnam occurred within the larger context of the Cold War between the US and the USSR. It was, and remains, morally ambiguous and controversial. The Vietnam War was slated as both a war against Communism and a war aimed at suppressing dangerous nationalist self-determination. Christian G. Appy's book, Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam, is a graphic and perceptive portrayal of soldiers' experiences and the lasting effects the Vietnam War has had on the American culture and people. Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam, is an analytical work that has three major purposes: 1. to show that those who fought in Vietnam were predominantly from the working class 2. to convey the experiences of the soldiers who served in Vietnam and 3. to offer his own scathing commentary of American actions in Vietnam.
Lawrence’s purpose in writing this book was concise and to the point. In recent history, due to the fall of the Soviet bloc, new information has been made available for use in Vietnam. As stated in the introduction, “This book aims to take account of this new scholarship in a brief, accessible narrative of the Vietnam War… It places the war within the long flow of Vietnamese history and then captures the goals and experiences of various governments that became deeply embroiled in the country during the second half of the twentieth century” (Lawrence, 3.) This study is not only about the American government and how they were involved in the Vietnam conflict, but highlights other such countries as France, China, and the Soviet Union. Lawrence goes on to say that one of his major goals in writing this book is to examine the American role in Vietnam within an international context (Lawrence, 4.) Again, this goes to show that the major purpose of Lawrence’s study included not only ...
Tim O’Brien’s book, The Things They Carried, portrays stories of the Vietnam War. Though not one hundred percent accurate, the stories portray important historical events. The Things They Carried recovers Vietnam War history and portrays situations the American soldiers faced. The United States government represents a political power effect during the Vietnam War. The U. S. enters the war to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam. The U.S. government felt if communism spreads to South Vietnam, then it will spread elsewhere. Many Americans disapproved of their country’s involvement. Men traveled across the border to avoid the draft. The powerful United States government made the decision to enter the war, despite many Americans’ opposition. O’Brien’s The Things They Carried applies New Historicism elements, including Vietnam history recovery and the political power of the United States that affected history.
Nixon’s approach to the war was Birchesque. He campaigned for president in 1968 as a peace candidate by pointing out that he had been raised as a Quaker and promising to bring the troops home. His path to peace, however, entailed an escalated war. After his election as president, he unleashed a ferocious air assault on the Vietnamese and extended the ground war into Laos and Cambodia. When the anti-war movement criticized these measures, Nixon did what any Bircher would do: he decried the anti-war movement as a communist conspiracy that was prolonging the war and that deserved to be treated as an internal security threat.
Vietnam was a highly debated war among citizens of the United States. This war was like no other with regards to how it affected people on the home front. In past war’s the population of the United States mainly supported the war and admired soldiers for their courage. During the Vietnam War, citizens of the U.S. had a contradictory view then in the past. This dilemma of not having the support of the people originates from the culture and the time period. During this time period it would be the fourth time Americans went to war in that century which made it tough for Americans to give their supportS (Schlesinger 8). Most Americans did not know why the country was getting involved in Vietnam as well as what the United States’ agenda was. This dilemma ties into the short story, “On the Rainy River” which is a passage from Tim O’Brien’s book The Things They Carried.
On April 30, 1970, when Nixon gave a speech announcing his invasion of Cambodia, anti-war factions rose up across the United States. In the speech he stated that, “If, when the chips are down…the world’s most powerful nation, the United States of America, acts like a pitiful, helpless giant, the forces of totalitarianism and anarchy will threaten free nations and institutions around the world. I would rather be a one term president and do what I believe is right than to be a two term president at the cost of seeing America become a second rate power.” Students did not agree with Nixon and protests cropped up on university campuses in the days that followed his speech. Amongst these protesters were students of Kent State University, “The Cambodian invasion defined a watershed in the attitude of Kent students toward American policy in the Indochina War.” At this point, the first two days of May, the students were protesting Nixon’s actions. While the cou...
Source G: "The Vietnam War and Its Aftermath." American Voices. Glenview: Scott Foresman, 1995. 821-47. Print.
In the beginning of his Beyond Vietnam speech, King recalled that “there were experiments, hopes, and new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it were some idle political plaything of society gone mad on war” (6). By using such descriptive language that appeals to one of our five senses, sight, King was able to help the American people paint an image of the jubilant road that the United States was presumptively heading and then crushed, when it became involved with the Vietnam War. Furthermore, King adds that sending US troops to fight the war was not only devastating the hopes of the poor at home, but it is equivalent as “sending their sons their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population” (15). King’s usage of various descriptors provided insightful imagery, which allows his audience to picture as if they were the ones who actually sent their own loved ones to war. Martin Luther King Jr.’s use of appealing to the feeling of pity, anger, and sadness to strengthen and refine his
Vietnam was really just a pawn in the much larger game of the Cold War. The main political objective behind the Unites States’ involvement in the Vietnam War was to set forth it’s policy of containment prevent the “Domino E...
The Vietnam War was the longest and most expensive war in American History. The toll we paid wasn't just financial, it cost the people involved greatly, physically and mentally. This war caused great distress and sadness, as well as national confusion. Everyone had that one burning question being why? Why were we even there? The other question being why did America withdrawal from Vietnam. The purpose of this paper is to answer these two burning questions, and perhaps add some clarity to the confusion American was experiencing.
Roark, James L. "Vietnam and the Limits of Power 1961-1975." The American Promise: A History of the United States. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. 1,062- 1,100. Print.
It is understandable that some Americans strongly opposed the United States getting involved in the Vietnam War. It had not been a long time since the end of World War II and simply put, most Americans were tired of fighting. Mark Atwood Lawrence is one of the people who opposed our involvement in the Vietnam War. In his essay, “Vietnam: A Mistake of Western Alliance”, Lawrence argues that the Vietnam War was unnecessary and that it went against our democratic policies, but that there were a lot of things that influenced our involvement.
The Vietnam War brought many tears and casualties to both the United States and Vietnam. Millions of soldiers lost their lives in the time consuming battle. On February 8, 1967 President Lyndon B. Johnson wrote a letter to Ho Chi Minh, Dictator of Vietnam at the time. President Johnson’s letter expresses his hopes of ending this conflict that has gone on so long in Vietnam. President Ho Chi Minh replied back on February 15, 1967 stating that it had been the United States that prolonged the wicked war. President Ho Chi Minh’s reply to President Johnson was the more persuasive of the two letters, because he appealed more to pathos, used stronger and bolder diction, and asked an important rhetorical question.
The Vietnam War was a war that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from November 1st 1955 to the fall of Saigon on April 30th 1975. This war was fought between the North Vietnamese Viet Cong and the government of South Vietnam. The criticism of the war in Vietnam started out as a reaction to President Johnson’s policy of fighting for a limited purpose and a negotiated peace in Vietnam. Criticism is valuable because it helps to correct communal procedures. That is a great advantage of exposed societies. But criticism works only if those in control have a sufficient intellect in order to recognize when a policy has gone wrong. The Vietnam War and its leaders is a "monument to the failure of that necessary wisdom" (Lewis). The supporters were known as “hawks.” As the President escalated the war effort, and became a hawk himself, his chief critics who disagreed with the war became known as “doves,” which included college students, faculty, and several other people who felt that the war was corrupt, was promoting no advantage for the US, and was increasing the number of casualties. But the Doves’ access to this goal is restricted: the war drags on. Many disaffected doves adapt to this situation by rebellion. They reject societal goals and means
While Nixon was in office, he used the war to his benefit, helping him win another term in office. Nixon’s plan was to use “Vietnamization,” a process in which American soldiers would train South Vietnamese to fight for themselves and eventually drawing American troops out of the war (Vietnamization). At first, General WestPoint was in charge, raiding Vietcong bases and trying to eliminate them. The original plan was to use the body count to discourage any more NVA troops from fighting, but this strategy backfired because both Vietnamese and American troops had high body counts. General Abraham was appointed as commander and began the “Vietnamization” strategy, which only seemed to work in the public’s eyes. Nixon made a treaty with South Vietnamese President, to have a ceasefire to withdraw American troops and release American POWs while South Vietnam took over the war (The). Nixon planned to use this strategy to withdraw all American troops, however it was “worse, Nixon would leave North Vietnamese troops occupying and controlling much of the South, while withdrawing all remaining American ground forces (Hughes).” Nixon’s use of Vietnamization helped to further his political resolve. He “sacrificed the lives of American soldiers to further his electoral ends (Hughes).” The ...