What led to the Americans to involve in massacre of civilians during Vietnam War?

Question

Or this is part of media exaggeration?

Answer 1

Firstly, I'm a Vietnam combat vet, two tours, 11B50 rifleman. I'm proud of my service and how the units I served with performed. Taking actions out of context can make them seem even more heinous. Its very difficult to make combat actions, especially in a guerrilla type war to make sense.

In the case of My Lai there's no excuse. That unit didn't receive more fire or more casualties than others. It was poorly commanded, in a make shift division with no real history to be proud of. Do not underestimate the character associated with, and the pride attached to serving with a particular unit. Mine was the 1st Calvary Division.

Lt Calley, a Sp4 Meadlo plus others murdered in the neighborhood of 500 old men, women, and children in a ditch to the southwest side of My Lai 4. That's a proven fact. The army tried to cover it up. Didn't want the "bad press" to get out. A chopper pilot, Chief Warrant Officer Thompson reported that he saw Calley grab a toddler, throw him back in the ditch of dead civilians and shoot him. Others reported that Calley shot over 80 civilians by himself. This was reported to brigade command by CWO Thompson. his report was buried.

A very determined ex-GI named Ridenhour wrote many letters after returning to the states. He wrote, the president, the joint chiefs, the sec of defense, and members of congress. Rep Mo Udall was the only one that followed up. Eventually a courts martial was held, Lt Calley was found guilty, sentenced to life in prison. Nixon had Calley removed from the stockade and put on house arrest. Eventually he paroled Lt Calley.

I think there are two really important things to keep in mind.
1) It was soldiers that persevered to see that these crimes saw the light of day and were prosecuted.
2) It is the basic freedoms of this country that insured the facts were made public.

We wash our dirty linen out where everyone can see. It hurts some times but its the right thing to do. Blaming the press for this is another case of shooting the messenger because you don't like the message.

Answer 2

Nobody did. Don't buy into that propaganda.

The Military Rules of Engagement state that if attacked by any armed person, that person is no longer a civilian, but a combatant. There have been instances in history where, after such alleged massacres, weapons were removed and cover-ups ensued to cause the Americans to be shed in a bad light.

In reality, I am sure that a few of these soldiers, with the reduced psychological knowledge and care at the time, someone cracked and murdered civilians. And, with the "any able bodied person" attitude during the Viet Nam war era, some bad seed got in and committed the same. I am also sure that unfortunate instances happened through bad intel, miscommunication and bad coordinates that caused "collateral damage", but not an intentional massacre.

My bet is, these instances were much more rare than the "hell no we won't go" crowd have led us to believe.

My rationale is this: How many of our soldiers would actually have been willing to commit such atrocities? These were our brothers, fathers, Grandfathers, uncles, cousines...

Answer 3

The persons in touch have been court docket marshaled. whilst the U. S. militia dose no longer have a ideal checklist interior the 20 th century US forces have tried to stay away from civilian casualties. the U. S. military Air forces in international war II flew bombing raids in super daylight hours notwithstanding it positioned the bombers at greater desirable probability to stay away from civilian casualties. With Vietnam incidents like this did happen yet they have been opposite to and unlawful by using US militia coverage whilst the VC and NVA massacred civilians as a count of coverage.

Answer 4

As far as I know civilian massacres in Vietnam happened only once and the media went overboard with it. I suspect a liberal teacher has assigned this question to you. Perhaps not.

What is an even better question is how many civilians were massacred in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia when the Democratically controlled U.S. congress cut off funding and the U.S. withdrew from Vietnam. This made the one U.S. massacre look like a Sunday school meeting.

Look it up. The media never wanted to report on that and to this day the liberals are in denial that it ever happened. Look it up. Look it up.

Answer 5

In a guerrilla war such as occured in Viet Nam where the civilians take an active part in the fighting, then the civilians are subject to attack.

Throughout Viet Nam the areas of operations with the highest civilian casulaties were where the R.O.K.s operated (Republic of Korea) infantry divisions. The Asians don't mess around with guerrilla warfare and will kill civilians without hesitation.

So any Army will target civilians if those civilians engaged in guerrilla warfare.

Answer 6

depends upon ones point of view. there were many civilians who were shooting at troops. in many instances it became a matter of self - preservation. shoot first and ask questions later. this was not nor will it ever be the first or last time this situation happened.

Answer 7

I will assume you are referring to the My Lai massacre. The soldiers who carried it out were scared, frustrated and poorly led. They were stopped by other american soldiers, tried and convicted by military courts and punished.

Given the general course of human history it is amazing that there were so few atrocities, that they were stopped by other americans and the offenders were punished.

Answer 8

I think that the answer lies in the psychology of scared, angry young men in a hostile environment - not politics.