Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Why Vietnam?
The more we talk about Vietnam, the more I notice how futile it was to attack in the first place. The US decided to try fighting an ideal, contain it so as to "protect" democracy and fought against an enemy it with tactics that failed to suit the environment. Perhaps the US was still riding off of its victory in WWII and felt the need to police the world. Of course it didn't help to have the war so open to the US public by broadcasting it, making it very unpopular. Perhaps any war would be unpopular if broadcasted to the general public, but when there are so many casualties and so many instances in which the Vietnamese villagers are being terrorized it helps start the cry for an end to a war which seems so unnecessary. Even though the US went in to help the South Vietnam government stop the spread of Communism, our presence turned Vietnamese villagers to the Vietcong. The bigger our presence became, the more confrontations there were resulting in more deaths resulting in more men being drafted for duty. Although the men who were being drafted were simple soldiers following orders, the public became hostile towards them as well, often insulting and spitting upon returning soldiers; regarding them as lackeys for the unpopular war rather than seeing them as men who were called upon by their country to fight. The US government continued to fight a war that was extremely unpopular to even its own citizens for reasons that didn't seem worth it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Mr. Fleming regularly compares Iraq to Vietnam, and that was my first thought when i began reading. i think that view reflects the way a lot of people view the war in Iraq.
The more i learn about the VC the more interested i am. Civilians "betraying" their own country is interesting to me from a psychological point of view. i think a lot of it is anger at those who are attacking, and frankly i don't blame the Vietnamese (though i also don't side with the VC, clearly).
Why Vietnam? I think it is everything you said: riding on a high from WWII, expanding global power, and "the white man's burden," altruism. Two of those still apply to our fighting today. Clearly we haven't learned from our past mistakes. History repeated itself. One thing I think America has learned is to respect our soldiers. Though the Iraqi War is not as widely publicized as the Vietnam War was, the two are very similar, with some exceptions. I think we do see a large majority of our soldiers as heroes, and our "protectors of freedom," and this is why we laud them today. During Vietnam, it was all new, and then we didn't recognize that it wasn't the soldiers' faults, it was our government.
I agree with both Frankie and Scott in that part of the reason we went into Vietnam was due to the victory in WWII and that the US felt that it needed to "police the world".
I also believe that the broadcasting of the war played a major part in the american public's feeling towards being at war. I was thinking about news coverage pertaining to US wars (mainly wars regarding daily information given to the public) and i couldnt think of a war that the american public has supported for its entirety since daily broadcasting began.
One point you make in your blog, that the US was "still riding off of its victory in WWII," really makes me think. After WWII, the US became the world superpower, and maybe this war was the US trying to flex their new muscle. I think that the US learned something from this, especially in terms of the terrible nature of war and the danger of standing against a concept.
I think the US needs to be more responsible for itself rather than try to stop other peoples from doing things that really don't apply to us all that much. Communism falls into this category to me.
I agree that the main reason America went into Vietnam was to "police" the spread of communism. I think the only country we ever needed to be worried about regarding communism was obviously the USSR. Although this point seems stupid regarding the fact that both the US and the USSR possessed nuclear weapons, I think that if we were going to fight a war against communism, why not fight the USSR? The USSR could have taken our action in Vietnam a lot more seriously and there could have been nuclear consequences. Finally, I think that if we are going to fight against a concept/political idea, we should attack it at its heart.
It is easy for us to criticize America for their actions in the Vietnam War as we study and analyze it today. We have to think of the global world during the time of the Vietnam War. Communism was spreading throughout countries and America perceived it to be a direct threat against their democracy and way of life. I am not justifying America's actions in the Vietnam War, but I also cannot label the country's actions as illogical or unnecessary. America perceived communism as a threat as terrorists today perceive the western world to be a threat to their way of life. This does not mean I am in favor of the terrorists actions, but I understand why they act the way they do. We cannot describe actions we do not understand as illogical, but rather it is important we understand and interpret the actions and beliefs of different countries and people.
I really liked your statement that we turned Southern Vietnamese into Vietcong. Thats a pretty powerful thought when you think about it. We made those who we were "protecting" turn their backs on us. That is one of the dangers of policing the world. Though we went into Iraq with all the best intentions, we have created an extremely polarizing environment. The nature of policing suggests that we think we are in fact above everyone else and that they need our help. In a global scheme, an attitude like that has earned us more enemies and fewer friends.
I think it was pathetic how people treated the soldiers who came back from vietnam. Spitting on them and calling them cowards for not tearing up their draft cards. They were the real cowards. Sitting around with their thumb up their *censored* or running around holding up signs, while their fellow citizens were fighting and dying in some god-forsaken jungle.
Another blog about fighting a war against communism/vietnam war. But each blog I got something new to say.
I do agree with you, I find it more and more bogus for the US's justifications for Vietnam. Why protect the world against Communism? Communism has been a very succesful form of government for China and Russia. I am not really promoting it but both communism and captialism works. With such an ideal that isn't even harmful, why protect the world against it? - maybe I am not educated enough but that is my opinion
Post a Comment