Do you think the us should have gotten involved in the vietnam war?

Question

Cite historical info to support your points.

Answer 1

The U.S. should have stayed out of Vietnam. There are so many reasons to list.

The Vietnam war was fought to determine which political regime was more powerful, communism or democracy(capitalism). It had nothing to do with saving or helping the people of South Vietnam. Sounds like the current war with Iraq huh?

The Vietnam war was a way to spark economic growth because the U.S. was starting to recede. This is common knowledge since war is historically the easiest way to save your economy.

The whacked out idea of manifest destiny that was alluded to as a reason for war is a bunch of idiocy. Manifest destiny is just another way of saying we have a right to own the world because all other nations are too dumb to take care of themselves.

The Vietnam War was an unwinnable farce. That was known going in. The only reason the debate still continues today is because for the first time in the history of this country there wasn't a clear majority support for going to war. That alone should have been enough to keep our troops on home soil, but the greediness and self-servitude of politics wouldn't allow for that, so American men went to die, against their will, for absolutely no future purpose.

Answer 2

The U.S. intervened to stay away from Vietnam from breaking faraway from Western administration and coming up alongside an self sustaining route. there become no genuine justification given to the U.S. inhabitants except the same old preventing "communism" nonsense. the biggest project the U.S. confronted become that the Vietnamese people weren't waiting to purely lie down and die. yet another become that the U.S. militia become as a rule made from conscripts who weren't loopy about struggling with an aggressive warfare adversarial to a tiny and powerless us of a. The U.S. formally lost, even though it were given maximum of what it wished: it destroyed the country, poisoned the nutrition provide, and left landmines for little ones to %. up and get killed by utilising. To on the present time, the USA has yet to convey regret, pay reparations to this is victims, or make any attempt to freshen up the ordnance that it left in the back of in the course of this is murderous attack. it may well be said that the attack wasn't undertaken because Vietnam become strategically major, it become done because if Vietnam might want to learn self-decision, different international places would have considered that as an party and worked to throw off imperial domination.

Answer 3

In WWII Indochina, a French colony, was invaded by the Japanese. Many saw this as a liberation of sorts, Indochinese nationalists found their new masters encouraged Asian nationalism, although without sovereignty. Those nationalists who felt that the Japanese occupation needed to end, retreated to the countryside and trained in order to overthrow the Nippon regime.
Ho Chi Minh was already a celebrated figure before the arrival of the Japanese. He became a natural leader among the insurgents and was contacted by the allies in order to plan an attack on the Japanese which never occurred. By the way, Ho Chi Minh had become a popular nationalist leader for showing up at the Versailles talks trying to get attention for the cause of Indochinese (particularly Vietnamese) independence.
When the Japanese fell, the insurgents took back the government in a bloodless coup known as the August Revolution. The French use their influence with the Allies to get Chiang Kai Shiek's China to invade the North of Viet Nam and the South was overrun by the UK/US. A deal was made so that the Chinese would withdraw and for Viet Nam to be partitioned. In the words of Ho CHi Minh: Better to sniff the French's butt for a few more years than to eat Chinese **** for the rest of our lives. Well, i'm paraphrasing... but it was along those lines.
Anyhow, the Vietnamese form a liberation army called the Viet Minh and fight a terrible war for their independence. The US funded 78% percent of the French war effort. That is the US payed for 4/5 of the effort to keep Viet Nam a colony. The Vietnamese win and they elected Ho CHi Minh as their president, who read a proclamation of independence borrowing heavily from the US declaration of independence.

Talks with the French result in an agreement to hold a plebiscite in 3 years to figure out if Viet Nam would re-unite and who would prescide over reunification. Ho Chi Minh, being the hero of indpendence was widely reputed to popular enuogh to win such elections and so the South Vietnamese US-backed dictator Diem violated the treaty and did not take steps toward holding elections, repressed Buddhists and his own population and even forcibly migrated peasants into concetration camps known as "strategic hamlets".
To force the government of S. Vietnam to follow up on its treaty obligations the South Vietnamese National Liberation Front recruited amongst the peasants and fought the Diem regime. The US sent strategic advisers and started an undeclared war on the pejoratively redubbed Viet Cong.

Your question should be rephrased. Did the US have the right to hamper the Vietnamese fight for independence? After they gained independence for the first time, Did the US have the right to violate South Vietnamese obligations under the Paris Treaty? Moreover, did the US have the right to bomb and dump napalm on the civilian population (death toll about 4M) to exercise its geopolitical strategic interests?
In my view, the Indochina Wars are a testament to the US gov's opposition to the values of thrid world independence and self determination, an assault on the principles of the UN charter and the Declaration of Human Rights.
Now i ask you, do you think it is right to put people's lives and nations at stake in order to have your government of choice everywhere in the world?

Oh, Jacnthab.... Neither Communism nor Capitalism hold a monopoly over democracy, which is possible in either case. The manipulation of democracy has been every bit as bad in the US today as it was in Stalins Soviet Union. If you want proof there is a sizable literature on the manipulation of the media in the US. I recommend the pamphlet "Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda" by Chomsky. Quick read, an array of sources and examples and an attached a text "Journalism from Mars" that will rattle your perspectives on War journalism.

Answer 4

Yes

Because people were being enslaved by a dictatorial regime (HoChiMinh) which, having finished massacring all opposition at home (North Vietnam) was masquerading as liberators (VietCong) of South Vietnam.

The fact that this dictator was an ally of the enemies (USSR, CHina) of the United States must have influenced Kennedy's decision

Answer 5

The people we hired and put into office did the best job they could to protect the interests of our nation.

Answer 6

yes . it shows to the rest of world that u.s military failure is not something new and that history repeats itself

Answer 7

NO. WAT DOES IT THINK OF ITSELF TO TRY TO DOMINATE THE WHOLE WORLD
U CAN TAKE THE EXAMPLE OF IRAQ TOO!!!!!