English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-08 07:32:13 · 11 answers · asked by Matt 5 in Politics & Government Military

11 answers

No. It was predicated on the domino theory that if one country goes Communist their neighbors are bound to follow. It didn't happen in Asia and won't happen elsewhere either. You have to remember it wasn't that long after the Army McCarthy hearings and people were still thinking there might be a Commie under every rock. Sort of like today where there is a terrorist lurking around every corner waiting to pounce on poor unsuspecting citizens.

Fear is a powerful emotion and when used in conjunction with a percieved enemy it can be very useful. It is nothing new. The Romans used these tactics to scare people about barbarians. Eventually, of course the barbarians won but only because people were tired of the threats that the Barbarians will get you and they don't come. The Saxons, Visigoths, and Vandals were threats at different times but it took them centuries to defeat Rome. Rome would not negotiate and so force was used to make them capitulate and thus losing more than they would otherwise have lost. Originally the Romans would have lost nothing but gained population including warriors but they chose to do it the hard way and so where is the Roman Empire today? Kaput.

2007-03-08 07:43:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

10 Aug 50 - First shipload of U.S. arms aid to pro-French Vietnam arrives

1951 - U.S. military aid amounted to more than $500 million by 1951

7 May 54 - Viet Minh overrun French fortress at Dien Bien Phu

8 Sep 54 - Eight nations sign U.S.-sponsored SEATO treaty

12 Feb 55 - President Eisenhower's administration sends the first U.S. advisers to South Vietnam to train the South Vietnamese Army

5 Sep 56 - President Eisenhower tells a news conference that the French are "involved in a hopelessly losing war in Indochina"

8 July 59 - Two Americans are killed and one wounded during a Viet Minh attack 20 miles north of Saigon

13 May 61 - President Kennedy orders 100 "special forces" troops to S. Vietnam


As you can see the US involvement predated President Kennedy by 11 years.

2007-03-08 15:40:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anastasia 5 · 3 0

Teddy didnt go to Vietnam, he served 2 years in Paris France during the Korean war, (after being thrown out of Harvard for Plagerism),

In later years he became a "U-Boat Commander" using the "U-Olds88" to torpedo his presidential amibitions, got a Kill though.

Now if you mean JFK, Yes.

The Oft Mentioned "Domino Theory" started to work, North Vietnam,South Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, then they tried Thailand, but failed.

2007-03-08 16:08:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

yes of course the need was the vietnamese, you must look into history books and articles ,the 60 ,ties were a very unresponcible time most were hippies .

2007-03-08 15:55:46 · answer #4 · answered by wmdavid 1 · 0 0

Hell, no. His intention may have been downright noble, but the U.S. as now developed a nasty habit of trying to impose our values on the rest of the world, instead of setting the brightest example possible, and letting their cultures evolve on their own terms.

As long as we insist on shoving our way of life down countries throats instead of leading by example, we will squander lives and resource.

(Iraq could have been solved during the first trip there. Or, a surgical strike against the key players. It should have been done with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. Amen.

2007-03-08 15:40:59 · answer #5 · answered by snoweagleltd 4 · 2 3

Yup, an ally asked for assistance fighting a rebellion which was being assisted by other countries.

2007-03-08 16:16:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Wrong Democrat It was Johnson

2007-03-08 16:18:25 · answer #7 · answered by Scott 6 · 0 2

War is sometimes necessary - but it is never right.

2007-03-08 15:49:23 · answer #8 · answered by pepper 7 · 0 2

we were already there, Junior. Kennedy just made it public.
but, to answer your "quesion", we had no right to escalate the madness there....and you can't revise history

2007-03-08 15:36:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

No, he was wrong in listening to Eisenhower and Nixon.

2007-03-08 15:36:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

fedest.com, questions and answers