1. Note all of the reasons why you feel the war in Vietnam is wrong.
b.) it killed many civilians (Source 50) like in the My Lai Massacre
i. this showed that everything was getting completely out of hand
a.) the leader America was supporting was extremely corrupt (Ngo Dinh Diem)
i. he attacked and destroyed Budhist shrines
1. which made the Budhist priests burn themselves alive in protest (Source 33)
ii. however America "knew of no one better" (p. 354)
c.) America wasn't winning any support from the people nor containing communism
i. the people hated the fact that they were kicked out of their homes, their farmland being destroyed, and innocent civilians being killed which made them turn against America and join Minh's communist force in North Vietnam
2. Note what you re trying to achieve with this poster. (e.g. to convince people to write to their Congressmen to get the troops out.)
I am trying to achieve with this poster to stop war. America shouldn't be in Vietnam, how were they supposed to stop people from being pro-communism. You can't stop a person from believing in what they think is right. Basically, I am trying to protest against America being in Vietnam, that they should get out and that they have no business there. Plus, America was getting out of hand in Vietnam, they no longer completely knew what they were doing over there.
3. List possible images for your poster. Think about: background (e.g. destroyed villages); the central image (e.g. picture of a young soldier); whether you will need words to explain your image.
Source 50-killed many civilians that were completely innocent, it was getting out of control
Source 33-Budhist priest burning himself, shows how corrupt Diem was to his people
Source 41 and 42-(Source 42) children running and one naked after Napalm was sprayed and landed on them, shows how the people were being badly injured (suffering) and destroying their farmland; (Source 41) after an American bombraid South Vietnamese try to rebuild their town, Hue, where it is completely destroyed which shows that the peopel were kicked out and had to move because of the US
Source 44-shows a soldier standing, watching a hut burn down which was someone's home, this shows how many South Vietnamese people had to move elsewhere because of America's search and destroy tactic which made them homeless.
4. List some possible slogans for your poster.
"What has been accomplished in Vietnam?"
"Get's out of hand, war should be band"
"Do they want you there?"
"Let them be communists, you can't contain ideology/beliefs"
"You made it worse!"
Showing posts with label Vietcong. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vietcong. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Vietnam War Turning Points
1. Why was the Tet Offensive a turning point? Explain your answer.
The Tet Offensive was a turning point because it made the USA ask questions about the war in America. This happened because America sent over 500,000 troops and spent over twenty billion dollars, and the communists and North VIetnamese were still able to make a surprise attack. America needed to think about why they had so many troops and spent so much money but the communists and north VIetnamese people were stil able to make a surprise attack. Even though the U.S. was able to take these sites and bases back the U.S. used a lot of artillerary and air power and killed many civilians, the U.S. questioned themselves about if this was really how it should go and if they were doing the right thing even though they were using so much force and killing civilians.
2. Are Sources 51 and 52 making the same point about the My Lai Massacre?
Sources 51 and 52 are not making the same point about the My Lai Massacre. In source 51 Ronald Ridenhour refers to the U.S. soldiers as being Nazis during the massacre. He says that they didn't go there to be Nazis, and he also refers to how there were soldiers there that had never been away from home before and thought that they were being courageous. The point Ridenhour is making about the My Lai Massacre is that nastalgic men were there acting like Nazis, that it was a horrendous act. However, in Source 52 the point Lieutenant Calley makes is that it was for the better of mankind, that he wasn't killing innocent civilians he was killing communism. This is the complete opposite of Ridenhower's point; Calley sees nothing wrong with the massacre while as Ridenhower and a few others saw it as being like Nazis.
3. Why do you think it took 12 months for
anyone to do anything about the massacre?
I think that it took 12 months for anyone to do anything about the massacre because Charlie Company had recorded only 20 civilians deaths and took it as a normal and inevitable part of war; so the US also thought civilian deaths were a inevitable part of war however they had the wrong information. It wasn't until someone in the war front had told Congress that they should investigate this event. Ronald Ridenhour had sent the letter to Congress saying that this event should be seriously looked at and investigated, and so then Congress investigated it.
4. Why was the massacre so shocking to
the American public?
The massacre was so shocking to the American public because there were so many innocent civilians that were killed, almost four hundred. This massacre showed the America public how wrong the war had gone. They thought that they'd be containing communism or getting rid of it, but thought that less people would be killed. This event showed how the war had taken a bad turn and went down the wrong road, America was no longer there helping the people but killing them.
The Tet Offensive was a turning point because it made the USA ask questions about the war in America. This happened because America sent over 500,000 troops and spent over twenty billion dollars, and the communists and North VIetnamese were still able to make a surprise attack. America needed to think about why they had so many troops and spent so much money but the communists and north VIetnamese people were stil able to make a surprise attack. Even though the U.S. was able to take these sites and bases back the U.S. used a lot of artillerary and air power and killed many civilians, the U.S. questioned themselves about if this was really how it should go and if they were doing the right thing even though they were using so much force and killing civilians.
2. Are Sources 51 and 52 making the same point about the My Lai Massacre?
Sources 51 and 52 are not making the same point about the My Lai Massacre. In source 51 Ronald Ridenhour refers to the U.S. soldiers as being Nazis during the massacre. He says that they didn't go there to be Nazis, and he also refers to how there were soldiers there that had never been away from home before and thought that they were being courageous. The point Ridenhour is making about the My Lai Massacre is that nastalgic men were there acting like Nazis, that it was a horrendous act. However, in Source 52 the point Lieutenant Calley makes is that it was for the better of mankind, that he wasn't killing innocent civilians he was killing communism. This is the complete opposite of Ridenhower's point; Calley sees nothing wrong with the massacre while as Ridenhower and a few others saw it as being like Nazis.
3. Why do you think it took 12 months for
anyone to do anything about the massacre?
I think that it took 12 months for anyone to do anything about the massacre because Charlie Company had recorded only 20 civilians deaths and took it as a normal and inevitable part of war; so the US also thought civilian deaths were a inevitable part of war however they had the wrong information. It wasn't until someone in the war front had told Congress that they should investigate this event. Ronald Ridenhour had sent the letter to Congress saying that this event should be seriously looked at and investigated, and so then Congress investigated it.
4. Why was the massacre so shocking to
the American public?
The massacre was so shocking to the American public because there were so many innocent civilians that were killed, almost four hundred. This massacre showed the America public how wrong the war had gone. They thought that they'd be containing communism or getting rid of it, but thought that less people would be killed. This event showed how the war had taken a bad turn and went down the wrong road, America was no longer there helping the people but killing them.
Monday, May 3, 2010
The U.S. struggles against the Communist in Vietnam
1a) Were the armies finely balanced or was the balance strongly weighted to one side or the other?
In each category the armies were mostly very unbalanced, with the exception of Vietnamese support. For Vietnamese support they were pretty even because each army upset the people in one way and made them against the army and country. However, in the overall balance of the armies they were pretty even. This is true because the US army was strong in supplies, modern weapons, and tactics; but the North Vietnamese army were strong in tactics, moral, and patriotism. The soldiers would do anything for North Vietnam and that made the morals much higher than America because their tactics were called Guerilla, where they'd attack from the woods, when weakened, or when retreating which made the US soldiers have very low hopes of winning. The US soldiers wouldn't really do anything for their country, however they had modern technology in weapons, good supplies, and good tactics. The technology and supplies clearly overpassed the technology of the Vietnamese people. The US had weapons that woud destroy their farms and etcetera, some of which could burn through your skin.
1b) Which quality was most important in determining who won the war? Was one feature so important that being ahead in that area meant that other advantages or disadvantages did not matter?
I believe that the most important quality was patriotism in determing who won the war. This is true because it clealy worked to the advantage of the Vietnamese people; it decreased US morale, killed many US soldiers, and made many US soldiers fearful. No matter what area or feature was most prominent or most important in determing who won the war the other advantages and disadvantages did matter. There was an equal balance among both armies that includes every category. Not one army had more power over the other. Sure the US army had better weapons, but the Vietnamese army had high morale and wouldn't give up, making them hard to defeat.
The failure of the U.S. army to beat the Communist in Vietnam was the result of its own weaknesses and Viet Cong strengths.
2. Now write up your answer. Use this structure:
a. The U.S. weaknesses were low moral, poorish supplies, inneffective tactics, and low support from the Vietnamese people. The soldiers morale was really low because there was no hope that they could defeat the North Vietnamese people. They were afraid all the time that they would just pop out of nowhere from the woods and get killed. The tactics like bombing and search-and-destroy were ineffective. The bombing raids on the Minh trail just slowed everything down, but didn't stop the Vietnamese people from being supplied by China and USSR. Also, the search-and-destroy tactic didn't work because it made people become against the US, there become less and less support from the people. This happened because they didn't like the fact that they were detroying their homes and farmland.
b. At the same time, the Communist strengths were high morale, very good supplies, and effective tactics. The Vietnamese people would never give up no matter what. They would get right back to work in fixing the tracks on the railroad that sends them supplies after each bomb raid. Also, they were always being supplied by the Chinese and Soviets, two whole countries sending them supplies, basically supplies kept coming in and being replenished. Lastly, the Vietnamese had effective tactics, which reduced American morale and made them afraid.
c. The U.S. forces did have some successes. For example, the Tet Offensive in 1968. The North Vietnamese and communists captured 100 cities and some military bases, however the US and South Vietnamese were able to recapture them room by room. The North Vietnamese thought that the other Vietnamese people would stand up and join them, but they didn't. This event shows that America had a lot of support in South Vietnam and that they were able to overtake North Vietnamese or at least get them out of their area.
d. However, there were some major failures as well. Examples of these were, the bombing raids, the My Lai Massacre, chemical weapons, and search and destroy. The bombing raids just slowed the communists and Vietnamese from sending and receiving supplies. the My Lai Massacre turned a lot of American support against the war, many Vietnamese people turned against them, and the entire goal to kill the North Vietnamese soldiers wasn't even accomplished none of them were found or killed. Also, the chemical weapons turned many people against them, hurt many innocent civilians, and killed necessary crops. Lastly, the search and destroy method killed many innocent civilians, they weren't able to find many soldiers, and it destroyed people's homes, which turned some people against them.
e. The Viet Cong had some major successes, such as the Guerilla tactics and decreasing US morale. The Guerilla tactics were effective because it caught Americans off-guard sometimes, and how they would attack stronger once the Americans were weakened or were retreating killed many soldiers and made it highly effective. Also, the Guerilla tactics decreased US morale because they were so afraid at being attacked at any time and there was no hope that America would win the war. Lastly, the set-up of their "hide outs" was very effective because they were undergound with booby traps, and the way they dressed made them look like any other normal person or peasant, which made it hard for the Americans to tell the difference.
f. However, they also suffered defeats, for example: the bombing raids and technology. The bombing raids detroyed many villages and made them have to work more and harder. The villages became hard to live in and having to work more made them tired and a little more weak. Also, technology was a huge defeat because the US had weapons that could destroy farmland and burn through your skin, while the Vietnamese had nothing like that. The Vietnamese also didn't have as high standard as the Americans, the American weapons were much more modern than the weapons the Vietnamese people had.
g. If I had to identify one major American weakness, it would be tactics because there tactics killed innocent civilians while they were supposed to kill the soldiers. This tactic, searh-and-destroy and chemical weapons, were supposed to kill the soldiers but they weren't, so they weren't really killing any soldiers in these tactics. However, a lot more soldiers were killed in the bombing raids. Also, the tactics did not reduce morale among the soldiers, while the American's morale was greatly reduced by Vietnamese tactics. This is really important because it made a huge difference, the Vietnamese thought they were unstoppable while the Americans were shaking in their boots. A scared soldier wouldn't perform as well as a confident soldier.
h. The key Viet Cong strength was tactics because it reduced the morale of the Americans immensely and killed some soldiers. However, reducing morale was greatly effective because the Guerilla warfare scared many America soldiers and gave them no hope of winning. While on the other hand the Vietnamese were confident and believed that they could win. Guerilla warfare didn't kill as many soldiers as the Americans killed, it was still hugely effective. A soldier will not perform as well if he or she has no hope compared to a soldier who is confident and believes that they will win the war.
In each category the armies were mostly very unbalanced, with the exception of Vietnamese support. For Vietnamese support they were pretty even because each army upset the people in one way and made them against the army and country. However, in the overall balance of the armies they were pretty even. This is true because the US army was strong in supplies, modern weapons, and tactics; but the North Vietnamese army were strong in tactics, moral, and patriotism. The soldiers would do anything for North Vietnam and that made the morals much higher than America because their tactics were called Guerilla, where they'd attack from the woods, when weakened, or when retreating which made the US soldiers have very low hopes of winning. The US soldiers wouldn't really do anything for their country, however they had modern technology in weapons, good supplies, and good tactics. The technology and supplies clearly overpassed the technology of the Vietnamese people. The US had weapons that woud destroy their farms and etcetera, some of which could burn through your skin.
1b) Which quality was most important in determining who won the war? Was one feature so important that being ahead in that area meant that other advantages or disadvantages did not matter?
I believe that the most important quality was patriotism in determing who won the war. This is true because it clealy worked to the advantage of the Vietnamese people; it decreased US morale, killed many US soldiers, and made many US soldiers fearful. No matter what area or feature was most prominent or most important in determing who won the war the other advantages and disadvantages did matter. There was an equal balance among both armies that includes every category. Not one army had more power over the other. Sure the US army had better weapons, but the Vietnamese army had high morale and wouldn't give up, making them hard to defeat.
The failure of the U.S. army to beat the Communist in Vietnam was the result of its own weaknesses and Viet Cong strengths.
2. Now write up your answer. Use this structure:
a. The U.S. weaknesses were low moral, poorish supplies, inneffective tactics, and low support from the Vietnamese people. The soldiers morale was really low because there was no hope that they could defeat the North Vietnamese people. They were afraid all the time that they would just pop out of nowhere from the woods and get killed. The tactics like bombing and search-and-destroy were ineffective. The bombing raids on the Minh trail just slowed everything down, but didn't stop the Vietnamese people from being supplied by China and USSR. Also, the search-and-destroy tactic didn't work because it made people become against the US, there become less and less support from the people. This happened because they didn't like the fact that they were detroying their homes and farmland.
b. At the same time, the Communist strengths were high morale, very good supplies, and effective tactics. The Vietnamese people would never give up no matter what. They would get right back to work in fixing the tracks on the railroad that sends them supplies after each bomb raid. Also, they were always being supplied by the Chinese and Soviets, two whole countries sending them supplies, basically supplies kept coming in and being replenished. Lastly, the Vietnamese had effective tactics, which reduced American morale and made them afraid.
c. The U.S. forces did have some successes. For example, the Tet Offensive in 1968. The North Vietnamese and communists captured 100 cities and some military bases, however the US and South Vietnamese were able to recapture them room by room. The North Vietnamese thought that the other Vietnamese people would stand up and join them, but they didn't. This event shows that America had a lot of support in South Vietnam and that they were able to overtake North Vietnamese or at least get them out of their area.
d. However, there were some major failures as well. Examples of these were, the bombing raids, the My Lai Massacre, chemical weapons, and search and destroy. The bombing raids just slowed the communists and Vietnamese from sending and receiving supplies. the My Lai Massacre turned a lot of American support against the war, many Vietnamese people turned against them, and the entire goal to kill the North Vietnamese soldiers wasn't even accomplished none of them were found or killed. Also, the chemical weapons turned many people against them, hurt many innocent civilians, and killed necessary crops. Lastly, the search and destroy method killed many innocent civilians, they weren't able to find many soldiers, and it destroyed people's homes, which turned some people against them.
e. The Viet Cong had some major successes, such as the Guerilla tactics and decreasing US morale. The Guerilla tactics were effective because it caught Americans off-guard sometimes, and how they would attack stronger once the Americans were weakened or were retreating killed many soldiers and made it highly effective. Also, the Guerilla tactics decreased US morale because they were so afraid at being attacked at any time and there was no hope that America would win the war. Lastly, the set-up of their "hide outs" was very effective because they were undergound with booby traps, and the way they dressed made them look like any other normal person or peasant, which made it hard for the Americans to tell the difference.
f. However, they also suffered defeats, for example: the bombing raids and technology. The bombing raids detroyed many villages and made them have to work more and harder. The villages became hard to live in and having to work more made them tired and a little more weak. Also, technology was a huge defeat because the US had weapons that could destroy farmland and burn through your skin, while the Vietnamese had nothing like that. The Vietnamese also didn't have as high standard as the Americans, the American weapons were much more modern than the weapons the Vietnamese people had.
g. If I had to identify one major American weakness, it would be tactics because there tactics killed innocent civilians while they were supposed to kill the soldiers. This tactic, searh-and-destroy and chemical weapons, were supposed to kill the soldiers but they weren't, so they weren't really killing any soldiers in these tactics. However, a lot more soldiers were killed in the bombing raids. Also, the tactics did not reduce morale among the soldiers, while the American's morale was greatly reduced by Vietnamese tactics. This is really important because it made a huge difference, the Vietnamese thought they were unstoppable while the Americans were shaking in their boots. A scared soldier wouldn't perform as well as a confident soldier.
h. The key Viet Cong strength was tactics because it reduced the morale of the Americans immensely and killed some soldiers. However, reducing morale was greatly effective because the Guerilla warfare scared many America soldiers and gave them no hope of winning. While on the other hand the Vietnamese were confident and believed that they could win. Guerilla warfare didn't kill as many soldiers as the Americans killed, it was still hugely effective. A soldier will not perform as well if he or she has no hope compared to a soldier who is confident and believes that they will win the war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
