Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Vietnam strategies essay
Communism vs capitalism in the Vietnam war
America's role in the Vietnam War
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Vietnam strategies essay
Was the Communist victory in Vietnam due more to the inherent weaknesses of the Saigon regime or strategic mistakes made by the United States? Discussion/Thesis: The Vietnam War provides us with a clear case of misperception and unclear objections. It is important to understand the root cause of the conflict and the nature of the protagonist. There were many missteps by both the United States and the Saigon regime, which the North Vietnamese capitalized on through the use of non-conventional means and the power of messaging. The conflict between the Communist north and newly installed Ngo Dihn Diem regime in Saigon boils down to two governments attempting to gain control of the their population. The difference is the way each employed …show more content…
History shows us that the story goes beyond the US involvement in Vietnam and exposes a battle between ideologies. Ultimately, the US will be unable to keep Saigon out of communist control, which may have been a sign of severe strategic mistakes. The true path to Communist victory goes beyond US military planning and execution. The US was forced to carefully balance military objectives with world diplomacy. The entrance of China or the USSR into the war could have catapulted it to a scale beyond any side was prepared for. True victory would have been a sustaining South Vietnam so that it could protect itself from continued Communist invasion. Even with the intervention of the United States, the inherent weaknesses of the Saigon regime enabled North Vietnam to attack their center of gravity and engage a war of attrition the South could not …show more content…
This event only served to embolden Hanoi’s message of reunification under a common goal, a message that Saigon could not effectively match. This played right into the hands of the North Vietnamese who followed a “Dau Tranh” strategy which is aimed at combining armed conflict into the context of political dissidence. Thus, while armed and political Dau Tranh may designate separate clusters of activity, conceptually they cannot be separated (Pike, p. 233). By creating a seamless bond between conflict and political dissidence the North could effectively communicate their message to South Vietnamese who felt abandoned by their government. With the country engulfed bitter fighting it is easy to see how the message of politics and armed conflict can be easily
In retrospect, it’s clear that the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese ability to combine both methods of warfare played a major role their victory. Their strategy provided them the tools they needed to win. In the end, they recognized that each type of warfare complimented the other to achieve their strategic goals.
The Americans were inexperienced with the terrain and tactics used in Vietnam. Their inability to adapt could have easily lead to their downfall. As described by a Vietnamese soldier (Source F) the Americans were “well armed but slow and clumsy …they were elephants“ in an environment where such things as traps and ambushes were utilised against them and their unfamiliarity led to many
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.
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.
In conclusion, I think that the United States became increasingly involved in the Vietnamese War because of the policies they had made as a promise to fight communism, and because they had sorely underestimated Vietcong’s ability to fight back using Guerrilla warfare. They refused to pull out of the war in fear of losing face before the world, but this pride factor scored them massive losses in the war. In the end, with both side sustaining heavy losses, the US were still seen as mutilators in the war, with advanced showing what their intervention had costed, and Vietnam was still fully taken over by Communism – they had achieved nothing and lost a lot.
Only in the Vietnam War was the United States’ participation criticized. This is such a gigantic change from prior wars that it bears study as to why it happened, and better yet, should have it happened. This paper will discuss the United States’ involvement in the Vietnam War, by asking the simple question, Should have the United States’ gotten involved in the first place? This paper will prove that, in fact, America should not have gotten involved in the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War took place between 1947- 1975.
The failure came from inside the United States. There were a lot of protests against the war. Those protests included moms who had their sons on the battle field, the people who found war was a waste of their tax revenue and the people who favored peace. That was too much for a president to calm down his citizens, and be in charge in a war in another country at the same time. The war did not get enough support from the Americans. Another matter was that the United States did not have the right strategy in this war. They took actions slowly and indecisively. Instead of fighting North Vietnam andVietcong by itself, which might lead to victory, the U.S wasted their effort on the weak Saigon government. The failure in the Vietnam War proves that the power and influence of the United States is not limitless. The United States has its steady place in the world order, but there is nothing for sure in this world of diversity. Therefore, the United States has to adapt itself to the development of the world not as a flawless country, but as a developed
President Lyndon Johnson had several issues he considered as he developed the rules of engagement for Vietnam. One of which was how he maintained tight control over the selection of targets for the air war, for fear that the bombing provoke the Chinese and the Soviets into a confrontation with the United States. (Moss 163). The other was how he counted on a reasonably quick and easy victory over the NLF and Hanoi. As a result President Johnson “did not confront the crucial question of what would be required to achieve its goals until it was bogged down in a bloody stalemate.” (Moss 162).
The United States was not capable of winning the War because they realized too late that the real war in Vietnam was not a military one but a political one. Beginning with Eisenhower, They were fully aware that the only way South Vietnam would win is with the support of the United States troops. Kennedy restricted the U.
“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).
What might have changed the outcome of the war is if they would have conducted counterguerrilla activities. Instead the U.S. Army adopted tactics intended for warfare in Europe. The U.S. tried to defeat North Vietnam by sheer firepower, but superior numbers and materiel lose their advantage against a determined guerrilla enemy. A second reason is the man power. When the North Vietnamesse needed troops people from all over would join in the fight and try to win the war, but when General Westmoreland asked for troops he was denied them which meant the viet cong had more troops and choose the playing
The Vietnam war is an incredibly controversial topic; some say America won, while others say that they lost. The cold, hard truth is that America took a major loss in the approximately 20 year long war and were never winning at any point. The reason the Americans officially lost the war is because they were unable to achieve their goal ; the exact opposite actually happened. Once the American forces left South Vietnam in January of 1975 communism immediately overran it. There are 3 key reasons that will later on thoroughly explain exactly why America lost the Vietnam war. First of all the Americans lost because the North Vietnamese wanted to win more than they did. Second of all the American’s bombing strategies were horrendously ineffective
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.