Political games of Vietnam
The Vietnam War was a pivotal changing point in the American foreign policy. Through the span of three presidents and the Cold War, Vietnam changed the outlook of America in the world wide arena. After the end of the Indochina war and oppression of Vietnam by the French, the country was split into the north and the south along the 17th parallel. Following the declaration of the Geneva Accord there was to be a demilitarized zone along the north and the south of the 17th parallel and each side of the nation would have 300 days to remove their personnel from the opposing side of the country. North Vietnam, or the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, was controlled by the Vietnamese Communist Party (Worker’s Party) the elected president was Ho Chi Minh. South Vietnam, or The State of Vietnam, was led by Ngo Dinh Diem. To the north Minn accelerated the communist logic and envisioned making Vietnam a great communist state. Diem viewed the conservative ways of western world led by The United States and would lead the new Vietnam into the new century with democracy.
The Cold War played a particularly large role in the foreign policy making of the administrations during Vietnam War and after. Presidents and cabinets were involved in the containment of communism. This was done in multiple was to include military actions, economic sanctions, and monetary policies that assisted in rebuilding nations that were affected by war. A few of the plans include the Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, and military actions in Indochina. The two particular views on containment come from George Keenan and Paul Nitze. Keenan’s policy entailed that communism was not a global immediate threat and that it could be thought of as wild fires...
... middle of paper ...
... John Lewis. Strategies of containment: a critical appraisal of American national security policy during the Cold War. [Pbk. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982. Print.
Gibbons, William Conrad. The U.S. government and the Vietnam war Executive and legislative roles and relationships. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1986. Print.
Lawrence, Mark Atwood. The Vietnam War: a concise international history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print
Rust, William J.. Kennedy in Vietnam. New York, N.Y.: Da Capo Press, 19871985. Print
Summers, Harry G.. On strategy: a critical analysis of the Vietnam War. Novato, CA: Presidio Press, 1995. Print
Willbanks, James H.. The Tet Offensive a concise history. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007. Print.
Vadas, Robert E.. Cultures in conflict: the Viet Nam War. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002. Print.
One of the key strengths of this book is the author's first-hand knowledge of the people, places, and events that he is writing about. He also supplemented this first-hand knowledge with extensive interviews. In one example, he elaborated on the "chain of command" in Vietnam, which began with General Paul Harkins (and William C. Westmoreland) to the CINCPAC (Admiral Harry Felt) and from CINCPAC to Washington. "Not once in their four years of mutual agony in Vietnam did Harkins's successor, General Westmoreland, pick up the telephone and call his commander-in-chief, President Lyndon B. Johnson. Westmoreland did not have the authority, he told me."(169) This information came directly from an interview with Westmoreland. There are other anecdotes similar to this with each contributing to the extensive nature of the book's detail.
Appy’s book is valuable to its readers in showing how Vietnam became the template for every American war since, from novelties like the invasion of Grenada to the seemingly never-ending conflicts post-9/11. But before all that, there was Vietnam, and, larger lessons aside, Appy’s book is a fascinating, insightful, infuriating and thought-provoking study of that conflict, from its earliest days
The Vietnam War: A Concise International History is a strong book that portrays a vivid picture of both sides of the war. By getting access to new information and using valid sources, Lawrence’s study deserves credibility. After reading this book, a new light and understanding of the Vietnam war exists.
E-History (2012, N.d.). Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://ehistory.osu.edu/vietnam/essays/battlecommand/index.cfm.
Fussell, Paul. "Vietnam." The Bloody Game: An Anthology of Modern War. Ed. Paul Fussell. London: Scribners, 1991. 651-6.
During the cold war, the United States engaged in many aggressive policies both at home and abroad, in which to fight communism and the spread of communist ideas. Faced with a new challenge and new global responsibilities the U.S. needed to retain what it had fought so strongly for in World War II. It needed to contain the communist ideas pouring from the Soviet Union while preventing communist influence at home, without triggering World War III. With the policies of containment, McCarthyism, and brinkmanship, the United States hoped to effectively stop the spread of communism and their newest threat, the Soviet Union.
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.
"Overview of the Vietnam War." Digital History. Digital History, n.d. Web. 20 Mar. 2014. .
The Vietnam War was the longest war in America's history of involvement. Twenty years of hell, land mines, cross-fire, and death. Vietnam was divided by the Geneva Accord. The north being communist run by Ho Chi Minh. The south being anti-Communist run by Ngo Dinh Diem. Before Vietnam was separated, it was run by France. France had ruled most of Indochina since the late 1800s. The Vietnamese were unhappy with the way the French were controlling, therefore, many of them took refuge in China. When in China, they began to follow the lead of Ho Chi Minh, who wanted to model the Vietnamese Declaration of Independence as that of the U.S. version. In the 1940s, Japan had taken over Vietnam which upset Ho Chi Minh and his revolutionaries when they had returned a year later.
This book would be an excellent source for anyone wanting to understand this period of the entrance into the Vietnam War. It is a great look into the character of each of the participants. It also would benefit those who are studying and learning how to develop strategy and policy for future wars that the United States may involve itself.
“Vietnam: A Mistake of Western Alliance” is not the only piece of writing by Mark Atwood Lawrence about the Vietnam War. He has written two books on the topic: Assuming the Burden: Europe and the American Commitment to War in Vietnam and The Vietnam War: A Concise International History. He has also written other essays about the war and co-edited The First Vietnam War: Colonial Conflict and Cold War Crisis. He received degrees from Stanford and Yale and is a Professor of History at The University of Texas at Austin (Mark Atwood Lawrence).
The conflict in Vietnam for the United States started when President Dwight D. Eisenhower went along with the domino theory and sent in military advisors in South Vietnam to stop the communist movement from taking place in South Vietnam. The Vietnam conflict was between the communist’s and the United States. North Vietnam was led by Ho Chi Minh, and Ho Chi Minh led the Viet Cong, a guerilla group to help spread communism. The United States were supporters of the South Vietnam because they wanted them to maintain their government rather than falling to the domino theory of communism. After Eisenhower’s term ended, John F. Kennedy became president and took control of the situation in Vietnam.
Contending versions of the Vietnam War and the antiwar movement began to develop even before the war ended. The hawks' version, then and now, holds that the war was winnable, but the press, micromanaging civilian game theorists in the Pentagon, and antiwar hippies lost it. . . . The doves' version, contrarily, remains that the war was unwise and unwinnable no matter what strategy was employed or how much firepower was used. . . Both of these versions of the war and the antiwar movement as they have come down to us are better termed myths than versions of history because they function less as explanations of reality than as new justifications of old positions and the emotional investments that attended them (Garfinkle, 7).
Vietnam was a struggle which, in all honesty, the United States should never have been involved in. North Vietnam was battling for ownership of South Vietnam, so that they would be a unified communist nation. To prevent the domino effect and the further spread of communism, the U.S. held on to the Truman Doctrine and stood behind the South Vietnamese leader, Diem.
Willbanks, James H. "The Real History of the Vietnam War." ARMCHAIR GENERAL Nov. 2007: 54-67. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.