2007-03-15 08:45:33 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Calley was responsible for the conduct of his troops who conducted the massacre. The troops were responsible for their actions & Calley was responsible for not stopping them.
You could go on to to place blame on the political & military conduct of the war which made it so difficult for Calley to do his job.
If you have time you should compare the differences between units in Viet Nam in the 60s with the ones in Iraq today. Viet Nam had draftees while today the troops are all volunteer. In Viet Nam individuals were rotated in and out of combat while in Iraq the US is rotating whole units in order to maintain better unit cohesion & discipline.
2007-03-15 13:26:29 · answer #1 · answered by Will B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The attitude of the US government towards the people of Indochina during their struggle for independence was one of absolute scorn. The US allowed its client state in the south to forgo the elections stipulated by the Geneva Agreement because of the likelihood Ho Chi Mihn would have been elected. The carpet bombing of the region was defined by American scholars as "forced urbanization". Through Operation Phoenix, adult males were systematically abducted, tortured and most often murdered. The ease with which NLF fighters handled themselves in the dense forests of their own country was countered by the spraying of defoliants meant to poison trees, and everything alive. The popularity of the NLF and its demands was so popular among the rural population that the US made it a standard tactic to evacuate villages and burn them down, taking the villagers to concentration camps (termed "strategic hamlets") . Add to that a myriad of accounts of rape, within and without the torture room, the use of Agent Orange and Napalm and the embargo placed on Vietnam after it won its independence and you will realize that My Lai, My Song and Pinkerton were only an accident in that it was so widely publisized. The truth is were thousands of similar events which resulted in the death of close to 4M Indochinese. The responsibility of which lies in the highest brass of the army with the explicit support of the American executive and implicit support of the legislative and judiciary. The whole of the US government is covered in the blood of the Vietnamese. The US population is responsible in its latency, its unwillingness to stop a murderous and useless war. The spotlight is again on the US, and the results so far are quite similar...
2007-03-15 09:18:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
As with any group of troops, regardless of what country they are representing, there will occasionally be incidents. It is usually given high priority for investigation and someone is accused and found to be guilty. Often there are other people involved that slip through the crack.
2007-03-15 09:04:00 · answer #3 · answered by don n 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He wasn't, as others here will point out.
But he was the one in command of the troops on the ground. It was his job to keep them in line and obey the rules of war. He didn't. Instead he either let them go crazy or ordered them to level the village. Either way, he has a serious burder to bear.
2007-03-15 09:49:08 · answer #4 · answered by adphllps 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no...you can include the US Government...combat stress...lack of support from home and abroad...watching others die because of micro-management...sent to a foreign country for no reason...alot of stress there...it's easy to crack up
2007-03-15 08:52:49 · answer #5 · answered by Michael K 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋