Congress was wrong in approving the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution! Can you imagine getting blamed for starting something when you retaliated? And then getting blamed for something you didn’t even do? I can imagine that and I know I don’t like when it happens to me, so I can very easily see how the whole incident was wrong. There were many major reasons that the whole incident was wrong. First off was Johnson’s standpoint on the whole thing. He firmly believed in stopping the spread of Communism, so he thought by keeping North Vietnam from taking over South Vietnam he would have to find a reason to be able to go to war. When he started trying to find a way he made some mistakes. He made some mistakes because he used “illegally” obtained information …show more content…
McNamara comes out of the meeting and reports that what Giap said was completely unfounded. And that there had to/ must have been an attack that day. So even after the war the U.S. leaders were still saying that there had been an attack that never existed. Finally after all of this is said I cannot for one moment believe that Congress’s was correct and that they should have made a slower decision and found out the truth. From the U.S. escalating the war and starting the whole thing. To the U.S. saying the North Vietnamese had started the war and that there had been a second attack that never happened so that they could have a reason to join in the war. Also if things had been done different a lot of human lives could have been spared, up to a possible 58,000 American lives and 3,200,000 North Vietnamese lives. Since this is how things turned out and that they could have been very different I think that Congress should take more time to evaluate the situation and get the facts before jumping to a decision, and that Congress should keep events like this in mind in similar situations in the
In August of 1964, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, the closest thing there was to declaring war on Vietnam. A war that resulted in millions of people dying, and the loss of liberties for a large number of people. The Resolution was passed because the government (and the American people) believed that the Vietnamese had fired torpedoes at a US destroyer on routine patrol in the Tonkin Gulf on August 2, 1964. It was also reported that a second deliberate attack happened against a pair of ships two days later on August 4, 1964. Based on this information, the President in a news conference announced to the U.S. that he was ordering air strikes against North Vietnam in retaliation for the attacks on US ships. But information now leads us to believe that President Johnson had ordered bombers to strike for an attack that never happened. It has even been reported that before the air strikes even began there was reason to believe that the attack on August 4th never happened. There are transmission reports from the commander in the Tonkin Gulf, Captain John J. Herrick stating that there was an overeager sonarman who "was hearing ship's own propeller beat" and freaky weather conditions. Also, Navy pilot, James Stockdale, who was flying in the area that night, stated that "our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets there were no boats there. There was nothing there but black water and American fire power."
The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track, written by political scientists Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, is a novel which describes how Congress has failed to fill its responsibilities to the people of the United States, and how Congress’s role in the American Constitutional System differs from the part it was designed to play. Mann and Ornstein describe the shift from Congress being a decentralized, committee-based institution to a more regimented one that focuses on political parties rather than committee. The authors believe that Congress cannot succeed in getting the United States back on track unless they start to follow the rules dictated in the Constitution. In addition, Mann and Ornstein
JOHN F. KENNEDY IN VIETNAM There are many critical questions surrounding United States involvement in Vietnam. American entry to Vietnam was a series of many choices made by five successive presidents during these years of 1945-1975. The policies of John F. Kennedy during the years of 1961-1963 were ones of military action, diplomacy, and liberalism. Each of his decision was on its merits at the time the decision was made. The belief that Vietnam was a test of the Americas ability to defeat communists in Vietnam lay at the center of Kennedy¡¦s policy. Kennedy promised in his inaugural address, Let every nation know...that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty. From the 1880s until World War II, France governed Vietnam as part of French Indochina, which also included Cambodia and Laos. The country was under the formal control of an emperor, Bao Dai. From 1946 until 1954, the Vietnamese struggled for their independence from France during the first Indochina War. At the end of this war, the country was temporarily divided into North and South Vietnam. North Vietnam came under the control of the Vietnamese Communists who had opposed France and aimed for a unified Vietnam under Communist rule. Vietnamese who had collaborated with the French controlled the South. For this reason the United States became involved in Vietnam because it believed that if all of the country fell under a Communist government, Communism would spread throughout Southeast Asia and further. This belief was known as the domino theory. The decision to enter Vietnam reflected America¡¦s idea of its global role-U.S. could not recoil from world leadership. The U.S. government supported the South Vietnamese government. The U.S. government wanted to establish the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), which extended protection to South Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos in case of Communist subversion. SEATO, which came into force in 1955, became the way which Washington justified its support for South Vietnam; this support eventually became direct involvement of U.S. troops. In 1955, the United States picked Ngo Dinh Diem to replace Bao Dai as head of the anti-Communist regime in South Vietnam. Eisenhower chose to support Ngo Dinh Diem. John Fitzgerald Kennedy was born in Brookline, Mass., on May 29, 1917. Kennedy graduated from Harvard University in 1940 and joined the Navy the next year.
Before I read this book, I knew almost nothing about LBJ. I had no opinion of him, good or bad. I can't even really remember hearing much about him. So I was given the rare opportunity to formulate an opinion without any personal bias, and despite popular opinion, I really like Lyndon Johnson. Despite his shady political methods (which is actually nothing unusual in politics), he was a man who knew how to get things done. I think people criticize Johnson too quickly. Although the distrust Johnson received from Americans may have been well deserved (when he with-held the truth about the escalating situation in Vietnam), how can one man be held responsible for Vietnam. Johnson didn't start the war, he simply inherited it from Kennedy. Sure, he could have withdrew from Vietnam, but when he started sending troops, he did so at the discretion of his advisors and with the support of the American people. But when Vietnam turned into the horrible "unnecessary" disaster it is remembered as, everyone backed off and Johnson was left to blame. I think the book did an excellent job showing the awesome pressure a president (who people often forget, is just another human being), is put under during a war.
As part of his campaign, Linden B. Johnson directed his efforts toward the improvement of life of those in poverty, focusing little attention to the Vietnam War. Yet once elected, he brought upon “the escalation of the Vietnam war to an intensity that few Americans expected when they cast their ballots for him” (Walsh). Johnson’s increased interest and support for the war created a major issue of misrepresentation, his election came from his ideas aimed at the “Great Society,” yet he authorized the increase of the original “20,000 U.S. troops to more than a half million” to serve in Vietnam (Walsh). The policies that the former president was elected under was what the general public hoped would come from his stay in office, yet his legacy would go on to be almost entirely regarding his involvement in the war. Not only did he bring the United States deeper into the war, he also failed “to honestly discuss how badly the war was going and to reveal the true costs of the conflict” (Walsh). This duplicity on the part of the former president, forged for a severe difference in preference and policy between him and the majority of United States public that had elected him into office for his first official presidential term in
The initial policy decision made by President Lyndon B. Johnson was to “Americanize” the Vietnam War (Tindall and Shi, p. 1341). This meant that American troops would be sent to Vietnam in large numbers to fight. The goal was to keep South Vietnam from falling to Communism, and
Congress has helped develop the Presidency as we know it today. This is because Congress argues over proposals and legislation proposed by the President. They are a major determent in whether bills turn into laws. But it’s not easy. One reason for this is because there are many powerful groups out there who argue about what should be discussed such as air pollution with the EPA or jobs.
The decision to aid Vietnam was a difficult one that all five Presidents struggled with but it was in 1961 when Kennedy sent a team to Vietnam to report on conditions in the South and to assess future American aid requirements (Rorak, 1,065). The problem was that this decision was like a snowball roiling down a hill, gaining size and momentum as it tore a path down the hill. While I agree with President Kennedy’s analysis that “this is their war and that they are the ones who have to win it or lose it” it does not spport the fact that the war lasted for MMM years. President Kennedy further states that, ”We can help them, we can give them equipment, we can send our men out there as advisers, but t...
Yes, I think Congress has too much power. Because under the constitution, Congress has the most important power and that is to make/change laws. (The powers of Congress-http://www.ushistory.org/gov/6a.asp) In this paper I will explain to you how Congress has too much power by, it being split into two large bicameral legislatures, they have the power of impeachment, and they have the power to approve the spending of federal money.
... all involved. President Johnson was determined to have a limited involvement in the war without involving the legal approval of Congress or the knowledge of the people of America. McNamara and Taylor regularly lie to conceal actions. McMaster has written a thorough look at the decisions of all these men, which certainly shows a Dereliction of Duty.
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.
Lyndon Johnson’s presidency was embroiled in foreign nations as was Madison’s. An advocator of the space program, Johnson and the leaders of Russia worked things out between their two nations. During Johnson’s presidency, Vietnam became his defining moment. Unfortunately, many people believe this to be his greatest failure. Never has a war seen more protests and draft dodgers. Even now, the word Vietnam leaves a rotten taste in people’s mouth. For Johnson in 1968, the United States joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, prohibiting the transfer of nuclear weapons to other nations and assisting other nations to join the nuclear arms race.
...n was the one who took the blame for the war, while Truman and Eisenhower got away “unscathed”. Stephen E. Ambrose thinks differently though. He said “One of Ike 's greatest accomplishments was staying out of Vietnam…” He goes on to say that his “hard headed military reasoning” kept them out of the war, during his presidency. It is also pointed out in Cuddy’s essay that it may have been Johnsons “flawed personality, and his key policy decisions” Americanized the war. Given what is known about how Johnson handled the war, this observation could be true. Cuddy goes on to say that Eisenhower had a clean break from the war with Ho Chi Minh’s “forces shattered French power at Diem Biem Phu.” Either way you chose to look at it, America did enter the war. Some thoughts and stratiges may not have been thought out like they should, but it is history and you cant change it now.
The Vietnam War is one of the most controversial subjects in American politics. The US went to the war under the guise of the domino effect, as they believed that if Vietnam fell, the surrounding countries would fall as well. President Johnson said “If you let a bully come into your garden, the next day he’ll be on your porch, and the day after that he’ll rape your wife” One thing that is not controversial is that we lost the war. Lots of different factors contributed to the United States unsuccessful trip to Vietnam. Among many reasons, one of the two biggest factors in the lose of the war was America’s foreign policy how and how bad the US underestimated how important freedom and independence was to the people of Vietnam. On top of that the US used the wrong military strategy, instead of focusing on limiting collateral damage the US used heavy artillery that killed citizens and alienated would be supporters. There was political corruptness in South Vietnam governments, which meant that they could not build an alternative to the NLF. At home, the public opinion of the war was decreasing at a constant rate and demonstrations were at an all time high. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong, and these problems all contributed to a Vietnam tour that went horribly wrong and an attitude among the American people that was growing ever doubt full of their government.
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 of Vietnam but on November 22, 1963, Kennedy was assassinated. Lyndon B. Johnson succeeded presidency and the problems of Vietnam were left to himself. In 1963, the Tonkin Gulf incident occurred where, the U.S.S Maddox was attacked by North Vietnamese naval ships on august 2 1964. Two days later an even more controversial attack happened where it was reported another ship was attacked again but has later been proven false. Johnson used these events to gain congressional approval to enter into Vietnam. However the Tonkin Gulf Incident was questioned to have even happened which makes the war undoubtedly questionable Immediately after the incident . Many troops were killed in Vietnam and the United States eventually lost the war and does not achieve their goal to stop communism. Despite the large amount of conflict in Vietnam that needed to be resolved, escalating the war was the wrong idea by Johnson, as the many consequences of the war for the United States outweighed the potential spread of communism.