Cause And Effect Essay on Vietnam War Text

Jonathan Friesen - Writing Coach

ϻ�adonis silva 8 012 cause amp effect vietnam war the causes of the vietnam war trace their roots back to the end of world war ii. Laos, amp cambodia had been occupied by the japanese during the war. m ost american wars have obvious starting points or precipitating causes: the battles of lexington and concord in 1775, the capture of fort sumter in 1861, the attack on pearl harbor in 1941, and the north korean invasion of south korea in june 1950, for example. The united states entered that war incrementally, in a series of steps between 1950 and 1965. Truman authorized a modest program of economic and military aid to the french, who were fighting to retain control of their indochina colony, including laos and cambodia as well as vietnam. When the vietnamese nationalist and communist led vietminh army defeated french forces at dienbienphu in 1954, the french were compelled to accede to the creation of a communist vietnam north of the 17th parallel while leaving a non communist entity south of that line.

Eisenhower undertook instead to build a nation from the spurious political entity that was south vietnam by fabricating a government there, taking over control from the french, dispatching military advisers to train a south vietnamese army, and unleashing the central intelligence agency cia to conduct psychological warfare against the north. Kennedy rounded another turning point in early 1961, when he secretly sent 400 special operations forces trained green beret soldiers to teach the south vietnamese how to fight what was called counterinsurgency war against communist guerrillas in south vietnam. In august 1964, he secured from congress a functional not actual declaration of war: the tonkin gulf resolution. Then, in february and march 1965, johnson authorized the sustained bombing, by u.s. Aircraft, of targets north of the 17th parallel, and on 8 march dispatched 3,500 marines to south vietnam. The multiple starting dates for the war complicate efforts to describe the causes of u.s.

The united states became involved in the war for a number of reasons, and these evolved and shifted over time. Primarily, every american president regarded the enemy in vietnam the vietminh its 1960s successor, the national liberation front nlf and the government of north vietnam, led by ho chi minh as agents of global communism. Policymakers, and most americans, regarded communism as the antithesis of all they held dear. Communists scorned democracy, violated human rights, pursued military aggression, and created closed state economies that barely traded with capitalist countries. Policymakers expected contiguous nations to fall to communism, too, as if nations were dominoes lined up on end. In 1949, when the communist party came to power in china, washington feared that vietnam would become the next asian domino.

That was one reason for truman's 1950 decision to give aid to the french who were fighting the vietminh, truman also hoped that assisting the french in vietnam would help to shore up the developed, non communist nations, whose fates were in surprising ways tied to the preservation of vietnam and, given the domino theory, all of southeast asia. Free world dominion over the region would provide markets for japan, rebuilding with american help after the pacific war. Involvement in vietnam reassured the british, who linked their postwar recovery to the revival of the rubber and tin industries in their colony of malaya, one of vietnam's neighbors. Aid, the french could concentrate on economic recovery at home, and could hope ultimately to recall their indochina officer corps to oversee the rearmament of west germany, a cold war measure deemed essential by the americans. These ambitions formed a second set of reasons why the united states became involved in vietnam. As presidents committed the united states to conflict bit by bit, many of these ambitions were forgotten.

Withdrawal would result in a communist victory eisenhower acknowledged that, had elections been held as scheduled in vietnam in 1956, ho chi minh would have won 80% of the vote and no u.s. Democrats in particular, like kennedy and johnson, feared a right wing backlash should they give up the fight they remembered vividly the accusatory tone of the republicans' 1950 question, who lost china? the commitment to vietnam itself, passed from administration to administration, took on validity aside from any rational basis it might once have had. Truman, eisenhower, and kennedy all gave their word that the united states would stand by its south vietnamese allies. If the united states abandoned the south vietnamese, its word would be regarded as unreliable by other governments, friendly or not. Along with the larger structural and ideological causes of the war in vietnam, the experience, personality, and temperament of each president played a role in deepening the u.s.

Essay Writing What Tense

Involvement because, having commanded troops in battle, he doubted the united states could fight a land war in southeast asia. The youthful john kennedy, on the other hand, felt he had to prove his resolve to the american people and his communist adversaries, especially in the aftermath of several foreign policy blunders early in his administration. Lyndon johnson saw the vietnam war as a test of his mettle, as a southerner and as a man. He exhorted his soldiers to nail the coonskin to the wall in vietnam, likening victory to a successful hunting expedition. When johnson began bombing north vietnam and sent the marines to south vietnam in early 1965, he had every intention of fighting a limited war. It was not expected that the north vietnamese and the nlf would hold out long against the american military.

College Homework Tracker

Massive bombing had little effect against a decentralized economy like north vietnam's. Kennedy had favored counterinsurgency warfare in the south vietnamese countryside, and johnson endorsed this strategy, but the political side of counterinsurgeny the effort to win the hearts and minds of the vietnamese peasantry was at best underdeveloped and probably doomed. Presidents proved reluctant to mobilize american society to the extent the generals thought necessary to defeat the enemy. Within the johnson administration, undersecretary of state george ball warned that the south vietnamese government was a functional nonentity and simply could not be sustained by the united states, even with a major effort. Antiwar protest groups formed on many of the nation's campuses in june, the leftist organization students for a democratic society decided to make the war its principal target. By and large in 1965, americans supported the administration's claim that it was fighting to stop communism in southeast asia, or people simply shrugged and went about their daily lives, unaware that this gradually escalating war would tear american society apart.

Evaluation of Geography Coursework

When world war one ended on the 11th of november 1918, the world thought there would never again be such an event. However, they were proved wrong as it would only be 21 years later, in 1938 when france and england would declare war on germany after their invasion of poland. These basic definitions of a civil war era man have been generally accepted as true throughout history. We also have differing views of what each region’s men were like in this time period.

According to rosalie silberman abella, systematic discrimination means practices or attitudes which have, whether by design or impact, the effect of limiting an individual`s or a group`s right to the opportunities generally available because of attributed rather that actual characteristics. But the main trigger was the assassination of the archduke franz ferdinand heir to the throne of the empire of austria hungary on the 28 june 1914. One of the many causes of ww1 was the two alliance systems formed at the end of the. Understanding the outbreak of the second world war requires keeping a perspective on interplay of and convergence of several factors…many historians are tempted to see wwii as a continuation of wwi, and call the period 1914 1945, the thirty years war 1 legacy of wwi and its peace treaties the. ϻ� general james longstreet has been referred to as lee’s old war horse, old pete, and old gloomy pete, but there have been other names that have been used for him such as scapegoat, scalawag, judas, or traitor.

Civil war soldiers have condemned longstreet for his actions at the battlefield of gettysburg. cause and effect on world war 1 world war one, a huge conflict that sparked in 1914 and lasting all the way until 1918. The war was between the world’s greatest powers as two opposing sides the central powers and the allies. The assassination of franz ferdinand was a great chance for germany to test their army, therefore germany encouraged austria to declare war on serbia and claimed that she would provide help if austria did that. World war 1 had many countries involved but not all of them entered at the same time.

There were three sides to choose from at the beginning of world war 1. One option was the central powers which included germany, and austria hungary, and were later joined by bulgaria, and. causes of the civil war since the beginning of time the man’s lust for power, greed, and money has lead people into wars. There were also times where people fought for their freedom, for their rights and other noble causes. causes and effects of ww1 there were causes and effect of the great war. These causes and effects are game changing plays in the war. Like how trench warfare happened or how the zimmerman note made the untied states join the war and how it changed the war.

Explain The Stages In Essay Writing

What were some of the main causes and effects of world war one? there were many causes to world war one but one of them was the cult of the offensive. According to class notes on 4/4/11, countries should not wait to be attacked, they should. ϻ�an essay on: cashman and robinson 2007 and howard 1983 what causes interstate war. There is a wide range of explanations and theories originating from both political scientists and historians, albeit adopting.