Apparently it has been deleted, ie. As it stands now, it appears the VW was the sole creation of Kennedy -- a view which few historians would agree to. Can we please have 1 some explanation of NV and SV communist groups role in the origins of the war, eg.
Delivered on 3 November I believe that one of the reasons for the deep division about Vietnam is that many Americans have lost confidence in what their Government has told them about our policy.
The American people cannot and should not be asked to support a policy which involves the overriding issues of war and peace unless they know the truth about that policy. Tonight, therefore, I would like to answer some of the questions that I know are on the minds of many of you listening to me. How and why did America get involved in Vietnam in the first place?
How has this administration changed the policy of the previous administration? What has really happened in the negotiations in Paris and on the battlefront in Vietnam? What choices do we have if we are to end the war? What are the prospects for peace? Now, let me begin by describing the situation I found when I was inaugurated on January In view of these circumstances there were some who urged that I end the war at once by ordering the immediate withdrawal of all A discussion on the effects of vietnamization forces.
From a political standpoint this would have been a popular and easy course to follow. After all, we became involved in the war while my predecessor was in office. I could blame the defeat which would be the result of my action on him and come out as the peacemaker.
Some put it to me quite bluntly: But I had a greater obligation than to think only of the years of my administration and of the next election. I had to think of the effect of my decision on the next generation and on the future of peace and freedom in America and in the world.
Let us all understand that the question before us is not whether some Americans are for peace and some Americans are against peace.
The great question is: Well, let us turn now to the fundamental issue. Why and how did the United States become involved in Vietnam in the first place? Fifteen years ago North Vietnam, with the logistical support of Communist China and the Soviet Union, launched a campaign to impose a Communist government on South Vietnam by instigating and supporting a revolution.
In response to the request of the Government of South Vietnam, President Eisenhower sent economic aid and military equipment to assist the people of South Vietnam in their efforts to prevent a Communist takeover. Seven years ago, President Kennedy sent 16, military personnel to Vietnam as combat advisers.
And many others - I among them - have been strongly critical of the way the war has been conducted. But the question facing us today is: Now that we are in the war, what is the best way to end it? In January I could only conclude that the precipitate withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam would be a disaster not only for South Vietnam but for the United States and for the cause of peace.
For the South Vietnamese, our precipitate withdrawal would inevitably allow the Communists to repeat the massacres which followed their takeover in the North 15 years before.
During their brief rule there, there was a bloody reign of terror in which 3, civilians were clubbed, shot to death, and buried in mass graves.
Three American Presidents have recognized the great stakes involved in Vietnam and understood what had to be done. InPresident Kennedy, with his characteristic eloquence and clarity, said: We are not going to withdraw from that effort.
In my opinion, for us to withdraw from that effort would mean a collapse not only of South Vietnam, but Southeast Asia. So we are going to stay there. For the future of peace, precipitate withdrawal would thus be a disaster of immense magnitude.
Ultimately, this would cost more lives.The Nixon Doctrine in the 21st Century. Much of the discussion of the Nixon Doctrine during the s focused on its third plank, regarding conventional forces. Vietnamization seems to. Title: The Cambodian Incursion: Tactical and Operational Success and its Effects on Vietnamization Author: Major JeffHackett, United States Army National Guard Discussion: On30 April , PresidentNixon announced thatUnited States andARVN forces would invade Cambodia inorder to destroy known NorthVietnamese Army .
As the American commitment waned there was an increasing media emphasis on Vietnamization, the South Vietnamese government, and casualties - both American and Vietnamese. There was also increasing coverage of the collapse of morale, interracial tensions, drug abuse, and disciplinary problems among American troops.
Debate/Discussion. Some say that no amount of bombing by the US could ever have won the Vietnam War. “Vietnamization.” But as this cartoon suggests, the South Vietnamese army was unable to frighten or stop the North Vietnamese.
In the end, this public discontentment had concrete effects, as the antiwar movement became a prominent force and compelled Nixon to start withdrawing U.S.
troops. In this sense, Vietnam was very much a “media war,” fought in newspapers and on television as much as in the jungles of Vietnam. UNIT 1: Living History and experienced its effects firsthand.
Grade Level: Grade 6 Time Needed for Completion: Based on class discussion and the video clip, list three major issues of.