2007-04-19 09:24:47 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
why or why not??
2007-04-19 09:36:55 · update #1
yes
South Vietnam was being invaded by a totalitarian regime. You will find many essays proving that South Vietnam was not perfect, but North Vietnam was a genocidal Stalinist regime which massacred thousands of its own citizens before invading the South. What is rarely mentionned is that North Vietnam also invaded and controlled Laos and Cambodia.
The US involvement delayed the occupation of South Vietnam by 20 years and helped exhaust the economies of the "sponsor" states of NVA- USSR and China. The cost of that war - even though it was lost - meant the end of the falling dominoes (see "domino theory")- after China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia - South Vietnam was the last domino to fall (until the advent of Carter)
2007-04-19 10:22:59 · answer #1 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The US came to the support the faltering French effort to hold on to their colony. The US got involved when the Roman Catholic cardinal Francis Spellman of New York saw that the church's foothold in Saigon was in danger of being lost if a Buddhist regime took over.
Vietnam is a single country. The division into north and south was never more than just a temporary administrative measure. The US State Department invented the pretense that "South Vietnam" was an actual state being invaded by another state, "North Vietnam."
The real aim of the Vietnamese was to get all foreigners out of their country. It always was. Before the US got involved, they drove out the Chinese, the French, the Japanese, and then the French again.
American policy was based on a misperception. Dean Rusk, Robert MacNamara and the rest were absorbed with what they perceived as a Communist threat, while the reality was nationalism. The "domino theory" was wrong.
There is a big difference between the Vietnam and Iraq campaigns. In Vietnam, the US tried to break Vietnam apart into north and south. In Iraq, the US effort is to prevent a breaking apart.
2007-04-26 16:33:46 · answer #2 · answered by fra59e 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
those that claimed that gotten smaller smaller and smaller till the eighty's whilst there have been no believers left. It wasn't till the hot millennium that historians and experts have revisited the Vietnam conflict tale and at the instant are understanding that each and each physique the hippy propaganda grow to be incorrect. Vietnam grow to be much extra justified than the Iraq conflict right this moment. It grow to be an significant area of the chilly conflict in basic terms as Korea and the Cuban Missle disaster. even even though it grow to be horribly dealt with and a brilliant form of of the 52000 deaths might have been prevented, yet that does no longer mean the conflict wasn't justified.
2016-10-03 06:28:22 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
this is a hard one to answer as you have many factors to consider.
The US invaded Vietnam so the communists couldn't take control of another country and allow the 'Domino Effect' from taking place (one country falls leans on another to fall and so on). With out the help of the U.S and allies the Vietnamese may have fallen to communism and put pressure on the other countries to fall to communism
However, the US in some way was egging the communists on. They wouldn't allow the Russians and thier allies to trade with them as they failed to see them as a country untill they stopped their communistic ways. This forced starlin to look at expanding his ideas so he and his people could survive therefore 'threatning' America with communism.
To say that the US involvement with Vietman justified is really hard to pinpoint at America and Russia were fighting for thier beliefs and had to much running to let the other win.
I personally don't think the US should have been involved as it caused devestation and mass murder/destruction but i know it would have lasted longer than it did with out thier help. so in that factor yes they should have been involved. Yes they should have been involved as they started the communits wanting to take over....
2007-04-26 15:55:02 · answer #4 · answered by lostie_fan 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no it was ordered of past president lbj.. i remember the slogan'hey lbj! how many boys did u kill today? ask yourself it it was justified after reading the lyrics of arlo guthrie... "well its one two three what are we fightin for? dont ask me i dont give a damn next stop is vietnam! then its five, six, seven open up the pearly gates. Dont take time to wonder why Whoopie we're all gonna die! donalore_43
2007-04-27 07:20:09 · answer #5 · answered by donalore_43 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-04-19 09:32:56 · answer #6 · answered by psych0bug 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋