The Cover-up
1. Regardless of the outcome, should the President of the United States have a right to privacy in regards to the Oval Office tapes? Explain.
I believe that the President of the United States should not have a right to privacy in regards to the Oval Office tapes. I believe this because if the president were to talk about illegal things how would the FBI know about it without having access to the tapes. The tapes can be something useful to see what the president is up to, whether he or she is doing something illegal or unlawful. The president knows that he or she is being taped anyways so why would he or she talk about things that might be illegal or unlawful when he or she could talk someplace else where it isn't recorded. Since the tape recordings are in the Oval Office the government and all that apply should be able to have the tapes not the president because in the Oval Office he or she talks about all the governmential, financial, and more things concerning the United States. Therefore, the government should be able to see or have the tapes to see that the president is doing what he or she is supposed to be doing.
2. Was President Nixon justified when he fired special prosecutor Archibald Cox? Explain.
President Nixon was not justified when he fired special prosecutor Archibald Cox because the only reason that he fired Cox was to stop him and the court from getting the tapes which would have gotten him impeached. Archibald Cox was determined to get the tapes from President Nixon, however Nixon didn't want to give up the tapes and Cox would have taken them from him. So to keep the possession of the tapes with him he fired Cox, which is kind of like intervening justice because Cox would have gotten the tapes and President Nixon prevented that.
3. Was Nixon creating a Constitutional crisis by refusing to hand-over the tapes? Explain.
Yes President Nixon was creating a Constitutional crisis by refusing to hand-over the tapes. This is true because it made Congress question whether the President had the authority or right to keep the tapes. The Supreme Court knew that the tapes had evidence on it that would impeach the president, however Nixon wouldn't give them up. If they both knew that there was evidence and that the president would be impeached who had the authority to have the tapes? Congress had to decide whether the tapes were owned by the president or if they were the federal government's property. They were divided because it is the president speaking, however the tapes are in the Oval Office which are part of the White House therefore part of the federal government.
Closure
4. Why do you think the American public was so outraged by Watergate?
I think that the American public was so outraged because the President didn't come out and admit to his crime and the fact that the Supreme Court couldn't really do anything to get the tapes because there was nothing in the Constitution saying that they could take them. The President kept denying that he was apart of the burglary and refused to hand-over the tapes, the public then knew that he was hiding something and might've lied that he knew anything about the burglary. In this situation it's similar to a child lying to his parents after breaking a vase or something and the child just gets in even more trouble after he or she lies because the parents are more angry at the fact that he or she lied to them. The America public were probably more outraged at the President because he lied to them.
5. Do you think President Nixon should have resigned? Explain.
I do believe that President Nixon should have resigned because there was no way that he would have won. The Supreme Court had all the evidence they needed to impeach him and there was no way out of him leaving the presidency. Why bother going through the legal processes of impeaching the president when it could be easier to just resign, it'd be a lot faster and possibly people would forget about it quicker. Also, if he resigned he might leave with some pride or dignity rather than being kicked out. Since President Nixon resigned it's kind of like him admitting to his crime and if he didn't he'd be almost saying or lying again that he didn't do which would make him look worse (therefor less dignity).
6. Do you think President Nixon should have been prosecuted? Explain.
Yes, I believe that President Nixon should have been prosecuted because if he wasn't he probably would have been president for the rest of his term and probably would have gotten more power as president. He was the president that pushed a lot of power to the executive branch (president), and if this happened there would have been no way that Congress would've have added an ammendment saying that the president didn't have ownership over the Oval Office tapes nor would they have realized that the President's powers were becoming too much (the president was getting too much power). Since the President was prosecuted Congress realized how much power the president had and that he shouldn't have that much power, plus they were able to deal with sticky issues like what the president has ownership of in the White House.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Watergate: Nixon's Downfall
1. How are the "plumbers" connected to President Nixon?
The "plumbers" or burglars that were hired by President Nixon to break into the DNC, are connected to President Nixon because he paid them about $450,000 to keep them silent and all the photographs or documents they took or photographed were shredded so that there wouldn't be any evidence that they took anything from DNC. Woodward and Bernstein looked into the Watergate burglary while no one else did, so they made the connections with the burglars or Watergate to the President and his administration. For example, they made links to many members of the adminstration to the burglary.
2. Who was the judge? Why did he hand out maximum sentences?
The judge was John Sirica. He handed out maximum sentences because he believed that the burglars didn't act by themselves, that they had outside help.
3. How were Mitchell and Dean connected to Nixon?
Mitchell and Dean were connected to Nixon by Nixon being accused of trying to cover-up the burglary. Nixon "dismissed" Dean from office and replaced Mitchell with Kleindienst, which was seen as an attempt at covering up the scandal by Nixon.
4. How were Haldeman and Erlichman connected to Nixon?
Haldeman and Erlichman were connected to Nixon because he had announced their resignition from the White House, and after President Nixon released the real tapes there were conversations between Nixon and Haldemen (and probably Erlichman) where they discussed strategies for covering up the burglary and scandal.
5. What did the following men tell the Senate about Nixon?
a. Dean told the Senate what the president knew, when he knew it, and that he, the president, and a couple other advisors had a meeting discussing the strategies to continue the deceit.
b. Butterfield told the Senate that President Nixon had taped all of his meetings and discussions, which some were about the deceit and scandal. He also said that the recordings and tapes were made so that it would be easier for President Nixon to write his memoirs.
6. Who was fired or forced to resign in the "massacre"?
Attorney General Richardson and the deputy attorney general resigned after refusing to fire Archibald Cox. Then General Robert Bork finally fired Cox, however Cox's replacement (Leon Jaworski) was just as determined to get the tapes from Nixon.
7. Why weren't investigators satisified with the transcripts?
The investigators weren't satisfied with the transcripts because they were edited and there was one section where about eighteen minutes nobody talked or said anything, it was expunged so that the investigators wouldn't know what Nixon and Haldeman had said. The secretary said that she accidentally deleted them.
8. What did the tapes reveal?
The tapes revealed that President Nixon new about the role of the administrators in the burglary and that he approved the plan to distract or take the investigation away from the FBI. Also, it revealed the eighteen minute conversation between Haldeman and Nixon which ended up disclosing the investigation completely, in other words the investigation and trial came to a conclusion.
9. Why did Vice President Spiro Agnew resign?
Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned because it was revealed that he took bribery from engineering firms while he was the governor of Maryland, and he thought that he'd be impeached because he thought he had no chance in winning the trial. He probably thought this because of the trial and testimonies of Nixon's scandal, he saw that the President was going down in flames and probably wanted to resign or leave with some dignity and didn't want everyone to take the time to go through trials and etcetera when he knew that he would lose.
10. What did the House Judiciary Committee charge President Nixon with?
The House Judiciary Committee charged President Nixon with high crimes and misdameanors. They decided that the president should be impeached because of the scandal, which the crimes and misdameanors of the scandal made the committee discuss and decide wheither or not President Nixon should be impeached. Also, they convicted him with obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress for not obeying to release the tapes to Congress after they told him to.
11. How did the Watergate scandal create a constitutional crisis?
The Watergate scandal created a constitutional crisis by Congress having to revisit the constitution. They had to fix how much power the President could have and fix the guidelines for the reasons why a president should be considered or should be impeached.
The "plumbers" or burglars that were hired by President Nixon to break into the DNC, are connected to President Nixon because he paid them about $450,000 to keep them silent and all the photographs or documents they took or photographed were shredded so that there wouldn't be any evidence that they took anything from DNC. Woodward and Bernstein looked into the Watergate burglary while no one else did, so they made the connections with the burglars or Watergate to the President and his administration. For example, they made links to many members of the adminstration to the burglary.
2. Who was the judge? Why did he hand out maximum sentences?
The judge was John Sirica. He handed out maximum sentences because he believed that the burglars didn't act by themselves, that they had outside help.
3. How were Mitchell and Dean connected to Nixon?
Mitchell and Dean were connected to Nixon by Nixon being accused of trying to cover-up the burglary. Nixon "dismissed" Dean from office and replaced Mitchell with Kleindienst, which was seen as an attempt at covering up the scandal by Nixon.
4. How were Haldeman and Erlichman connected to Nixon?
Haldeman and Erlichman were connected to Nixon because he had announced their resignition from the White House, and after President Nixon released the real tapes there were conversations between Nixon and Haldemen (and probably Erlichman) where they discussed strategies for covering up the burglary and scandal.
5. What did the following men tell the Senate about Nixon?
a. Dean told the Senate what the president knew, when he knew it, and that he, the president, and a couple other advisors had a meeting discussing the strategies to continue the deceit.
b. Butterfield told the Senate that President Nixon had taped all of his meetings and discussions, which some were about the deceit and scandal. He also said that the recordings and tapes were made so that it would be easier for President Nixon to write his memoirs.
6. Who was fired or forced to resign in the "massacre"?
Attorney General Richardson and the deputy attorney general resigned after refusing to fire Archibald Cox. Then General Robert Bork finally fired Cox, however Cox's replacement (Leon Jaworski) was just as determined to get the tapes from Nixon.
7. Why weren't investigators satisified with the transcripts?
The investigators weren't satisfied with the transcripts because they were edited and there was one section where about eighteen minutes nobody talked or said anything, it was expunged so that the investigators wouldn't know what Nixon and Haldeman had said. The secretary said that she accidentally deleted them.
8. What did the tapes reveal?
The tapes revealed that President Nixon new about the role of the administrators in the burglary and that he approved the plan to distract or take the investigation away from the FBI. Also, it revealed the eighteen minute conversation between Haldeman and Nixon which ended up disclosing the investigation completely, in other words the investigation and trial came to a conclusion.
9. Why did Vice President Spiro Agnew resign?
Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned because it was revealed that he took bribery from engineering firms while he was the governor of Maryland, and he thought that he'd be impeached because he thought he had no chance in winning the trial. He probably thought this because of the trial and testimonies of Nixon's scandal, he saw that the President was going down in flames and probably wanted to resign or leave with some dignity and didn't want everyone to take the time to go through trials and etcetera when he knew that he would lose.
10. What did the House Judiciary Committee charge President Nixon with?
The House Judiciary Committee charged President Nixon with high crimes and misdameanors. They decided that the president should be impeached because of the scandal, which the crimes and misdameanors of the scandal made the committee discuss and decide wheither or not President Nixon should be impeached. Also, they convicted him with obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress for not obeying to release the tapes to Congress after they told him to.
11. How did the Watergate scandal create a constitutional crisis?
The Watergate scandal created a constitutional crisis by Congress having to revisit the constitution. They had to fix how much power the President could have and fix the guidelines for the reasons why a president should be considered or should be impeached.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Women Fight for Equality
1. Experiences in the workplace
-many women didn't have the same jobs or could get the same jobs that men had
-few women had jobs (only about one out of three women worked for wages)
-the women that did have jobs were paid very poorly
-women were rarely promoted to manager type jobs
-the publicly announces facts (the above) made women realize that they should have the same rights or opportunities as men
2. Experiences in social activism
-men lead most of the organization and women were given lesser roles
-when they would protest men would just "brush them aside"
-they had group discussions because they noticed this problem where they talked about their lives and realized that all their problems with discrimination and sexism weren't unique
3. "Consciousness raising"
-these group discussions allowed women to talk about their personal lives and the problems that they were having
-it made them realize that in all of the stories told they all had the same problems: discrimination and sexism
4. Feminism
-was the theory behind the women's movement
-literally it is the belief that women should have the same economic, politcal, and social equality with men
-this theory had great momentum in the mid-1800s and sprung up again in the 1960s because of the political activism
5. Betty Friedan and The Feminine Mystique
-The Feminine Mystique was spot on when talking about how women felt and it helped "to galvanize women" throughout America
-Betty Friedan helped to create the National Organization for Women (NOW) which pushed for things like child-care help and to get more rights for women, it made women push for rights during the 1960s
6. Civil Rights Act of 1964
-the act prohibited discrimination based on race, religion,gender and created EEOC
-however women saw that the EEOC wasn't forcing enough or pushing enough for women in the work place so it led to the creation of NOW
7. National Organization for Women (NOW)
-was made to pursue women's goals
-pushed for child-care facilities that would enable women to get a better education and work/get a job
8. Gloria Steinem and Ms. Magazine
-Gloria Steinem founded the National Women's Political Caucus, she pushed women to get in a political office
-the Ms. Magazine was partly made by Steinem and it it dealt with contemporary issues in a feminist perspective
9. Congress
-passed the Higher Education Act which banned any discrimination on any educational program or activity recieving financial assisstance
-this led to all male colleges opening to women
-and Congress expanded the powers of EEOC to give working parents a break on tax for child care services
-passed the Equal Right Amendment in 1972 which guaranteed that both men and women would recieve the same rights and protections under law
10. Supreme Court
-they ruled in Roe v. Wade that women have the right to have an abortion in the first three months of pregnancy
11. The Equal rights Amendment would have guaranteed equal rights under the law, regardless of gender. Who opposed this amendment? Why?
The Stop-ERA compaigners, Phyllis Schlafly, religious groups, political organizations, and anti-feminists (all conservatives) opposed the Equal Rights Amendment. They opposed this amendment because they thought that the amendment would lead to "a parade of horribles." They thought that women would be drafted into the army, navy, and etcetera, the end of laws protecting homemakers, the end of husband's responsibility to provide for the family, and same-sex marriages, which they were all against. They thought that if these things happened it would cripple or possibly badly damage America and the way of life. Women would have too many rights where they would be able to take over the things men are supposed to do and possibly exclude men from their lives where they wouldn't be able to have children and therefor stop America's population from growing and becoming powerful. As the platitude "the children are our future" implies, if there were not children then there'd be no one to lead America and make America more powerful.
-many women didn't have the same jobs or could get the same jobs that men had
-few women had jobs (only about one out of three women worked for wages)
-the women that did have jobs were paid very poorly
-women were rarely promoted to manager type jobs
-the publicly announces facts (the above) made women realize that they should have the same rights or opportunities as men
2. Experiences in social activism
-men lead most of the organization and women were given lesser roles
-when they would protest men would just "brush them aside"
-they had group discussions because they noticed this problem where they talked about their lives and realized that all their problems with discrimination and sexism weren't unique
3. "Consciousness raising"
-these group discussions allowed women to talk about their personal lives and the problems that they were having
-it made them realize that in all of the stories told they all had the same problems: discrimination and sexism
4. Feminism
-was the theory behind the women's movement
-literally it is the belief that women should have the same economic, politcal, and social equality with men
-this theory had great momentum in the mid-1800s and sprung up again in the 1960s because of the political activism
5. Betty Friedan and The Feminine Mystique
-The Feminine Mystique was spot on when talking about how women felt and it helped "to galvanize women" throughout America
-Betty Friedan helped to create the National Organization for Women (NOW) which pushed for things like child-care help and to get more rights for women, it made women push for rights during the 1960s
6. Civil Rights Act of 1964
-the act prohibited discrimination based on race, religion,gender and created EEOC
-however women saw that the EEOC wasn't forcing enough or pushing enough for women in the work place so it led to the creation of NOW
7. National Organization for Women (NOW)
-was made to pursue women's goals
-pushed for child-care facilities that would enable women to get a better education and work/get a job
8. Gloria Steinem and Ms. Magazine
-Gloria Steinem founded the National Women's Political Caucus, she pushed women to get in a political office
-the Ms. Magazine was partly made by Steinem and it it dealt with contemporary issues in a feminist perspective
9. Congress
-passed the Higher Education Act which banned any discrimination on any educational program or activity recieving financial assisstance
-this led to all male colleges opening to women
-and Congress expanded the powers of EEOC to give working parents a break on tax for child care services
-passed the Equal Right Amendment in 1972 which guaranteed that both men and women would recieve the same rights and protections under law
10. Supreme Court
-they ruled in Roe v. Wade that women have the right to have an abortion in the first three months of pregnancy
11. The Equal rights Amendment would have guaranteed equal rights under the law, regardless of gender. Who opposed this amendment? Why?
The Stop-ERA compaigners, Phyllis Schlafly, religious groups, political organizations, and anti-feminists (all conservatives) opposed the Equal Rights Amendment. They opposed this amendment because they thought that the amendment would lead to "a parade of horribles." They thought that women would be drafted into the army, navy, and etcetera, the end of laws protecting homemakers, the end of husband's responsibility to provide for the family, and same-sex marriages, which they were all against. They thought that if these things happened it would cripple or possibly badly damage America and the way of life. Women would have too many rights where they would be able to take over the things men are supposed to do and possibly exclude men from their lives where they wouldn't be able to have children and therefor stop America's population from growing and becoming powerful. As the platitude "the children are our future" implies, if there were not children then there'd be no one to lead America and make America more powerful.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Why did the USA lose the Vietnam War?
Why did the USA lose the Vietnam War?
The Americans did not lose purely for military reasons. There were other factors as well.
Write an explanation AND cite a source which shows the importance of the following six factors:
1. US military tactics in Vietnam like search-and-destroy, Agent Orange and Napalm, and bombing were all pretty ineffective. All of the tactics made America lose Vietnamese and American support. The search-and-destroy method was ineffective because it destroyed Vietnamese homes and land making the people homeless, and the purpose wasn't even accomplished most of the time. The purpose being to find and destroy Viet Cong members, which in the searh-and-destroy tactic America rarely found anyone. There was nothing good or progressive that came out of this tactic. Also, a few America soldiers had the job of spraying Agent Orange and Napalm, which destroyed all of the farmland and forests, burned or injured citizens including children as seen in Source 42. This was ineffective as well because it turned support against America, lead to serious health problems, and destroyed an insermountable amount of land; which was vital for the citizens way of living. Lastly, bombing was ineffective because again it turned support against America, just slowed the Viet Cong and communists down, and destroyed many homes and land. The people didn't like being bombed on, it made some homeless and if their land was destroyed there was no way that they could earn money to buy food and support a family if they had one. More importantly, the bombing tactic on the Minh Trail and railroad just slowed the Viet Cong and communists down. After the bombing raid the people would go straight to work in fixing the railroad, so the supplies still came but just took longer.
2. The unpopularity of the South Vietnamese regime was also a major reason why America 'lost' the war. The United States supported Ngo Dinh Diem, who was extremely corrupt. Budhist priests would protest by lighting themselves on fire in public, as shown in Source 33. However, America kept on supporting Diem because he was greatly against communism, would kick them out without even thinking about it, and he was the only person that America knew that could possibly beat the communists. Things got so out of control and corrupt with Diem that even his own military asked permission from the CIA to kill or get rid of Diem, and America allowed it. This lead to a lot of loss of support from the South Vietnamese, and the US didn't want Vietnam to go communists so they continued to support non-communist South Vietnam and physically help too.
3. The experience of the Viet Cong and the inexperience of the American soldiers was a major factor for America losing the war. The Viet Cong were fighting on their own land while America came to Vietnam having no idea what the climate, geography, and etcetera were like; they might have had a general idea but not so much that would give them some advantage. The Viet Cong took advantage of being at their homeland and used Guerilla tactics to fight the Americans, as seen in Source 37. They would pop out of the forests and go back in and hide, Americans didn't know how to find them or just couldn't find them which made them scared and less hopeful that they could win the war.
4. Domestic opposition to the war in the U.S. made America think about why they were in the Vietnam War. When Americans saw photos of the My Lai Massacre like in Source 50 they saw how out of control things were getting in Vietnam. After the massacre people began to protest against war, and the President and government held a meeting and press conference discussing the reasons why America was in Vietnam. Many Americans saw no reason for America being in Vietnam and wanted the war to end and America to get out; the protests were effective in making the President look into the massacre and thinking about why they were in Vietnam. This lost of support made America think about leaving Vietnam and therefor losing the war because it enabled communism to take over Vietnam, which America was trying to prevent.
5. Chinese and Soviet support for the Viet Cong was a huge factor that made America lose the war. The Chinese and Soviet Union sent an immense amount of supplies to the Viet Cong, which greatly helped them to demoralize American soldiers and ultimately win the war. As shown in Source 38, the Chinese absolutely did not want America to be in Vietnam. The caption on the poster says "U.S. Imperialism, Get Out of South Viet Nam," which shows that the Chinese did not want imperialism in South Vietnam or so close to China. Also, since the Soviets wanted to spread communism and saw that Vietnam was trying to become communism they felt that they had to support Vietnam as much as possibly in order to spread their ideology. VIet Cong had a lot of support, but America barely had any. There was very little support from the UN so America was basically on her own. Since Viet Cong had two huge supports and America really didn't have any, the Viet Cong were bound to win.
6. 'But did they really lose?' Summarize the argument put forward in Source 57, and your view on it.
In Source 57 the argument in the text suggests that America had won the Vietnam war, militarily. It goes on about how America didn't lose one major consequential battle, how the fall of Saigon happened two years after America completely evacuated from Vietnam, and how it was Vietnamese civilians and military soldiers running for their lives and not America. One of the supporting points is that during the time when America was in Vietnam they didn't lose one battle; including the Tet Offensive in 1968 saying that it was a VC and NVA loss. Another supporting point was that the fall of Saigon happened two years after America had left; saying that "How could we lose a war that we had already stopped fighting?" Since America wasn't in Vietnam when Saigon fell and 'lost' America didn't lose, Vietnam did. Lastly, America didn't lose the war because it was Vietnamese civilians and soldiers running for their lives when Saigon fell not Americans. Therfore, since no Americans were running for their lives, as if retreating, they didn't lose; but since Vietnamese people were they lost.
I believe that America did lose the war to a certain extent, America lost the war politically but won militarily. America lost politically because Vietnam did succumb to communism and became a communist country, which America went to Vietnam to stop communism from spreading and stop Vietnam from becoming a communist country. However, the Vietnamese lost millions more men and civilians than America had lost. Also, as Source 57 says "American mililtary did not lose a battle of any consequence," which more plainly says that there was no battle that America lost that was significant enough to do damage of some sort. In conclusion, America lost the Vietnam War politically, but won militarily.
The Americans did not lose purely for military reasons. There were other factors as well.
Write an explanation AND cite a source which shows the importance of the following six factors:
1. US military tactics in Vietnam like search-and-destroy, Agent Orange and Napalm, and bombing were all pretty ineffective. All of the tactics made America lose Vietnamese and American support. The search-and-destroy method was ineffective because it destroyed Vietnamese homes and land making the people homeless, and the purpose wasn't even accomplished most of the time. The purpose being to find and destroy Viet Cong members, which in the searh-and-destroy tactic America rarely found anyone. There was nothing good or progressive that came out of this tactic. Also, a few America soldiers had the job of spraying Agent Orange and Napalm, which destroyed all of the farmland and forests, burned or injured citizens including children as seen in Source 42. This was ineffective as well because it turned support against America, lead to serious health problems, and destroyed an insermountable amount of land; which was vital for the citizens way of living. Lastly, bombing was ineffective because again it turned support against America, just slowed the Viet Cong and communists down, and destroyed many homes and land. The people didn't like being bombed on, it made some homeless and if their land was destroyed there was no way that they could earn money to buy food and support a family if they had one. More importantly, the bombing tactic on the Minh Trail and railroad just slowed the Viet Cong and communists down. After the bombing raid the people would go straight to work in fixing the railroad, so the supplies still came but just took longer.
2. The unpopularity of the South Vietnamese regime was also a major reason why America 'lost' the war. The United States supported Ngo Dinh Diem, who was extremely corrupt. Budhist priests would protest by lighting themselves on fire in public, as shown in Source 33. However, America kept on supporting Diem because he was greatly against communism, would kick them out without even thinking about it, and he was the only person that America knew that could possibly beat the communists. Things got so out of control and corrupt with Diem that even his own military asked permission from the CIA to kill or get rid of Diem, and America allowed it. This lead to a lot of loss of support from the South Vietnamese, and the US didn't want Vietnam to go communists so they continued to support non-communist South Vietnam and physically help too.
3. The experience of the Viet Cong and the inexperience of the American soldiers was a major factor for America losing the war. The Viet Cong were fighting on their own land while America came to Vietnam having no idea what the climate, geography, and etcetera were like; they might have had a general idea but not so much that would give them some advantage. The Viet Cong took advantage of being at their homeland and used Guerilla tactics to fight the Americans, as seen in Source 37. They would pop out of the forests and go back in and hide, Americans didn't know how to find them or just couldn't find them which made them scared and less hopeful that they could win the war.
4. Domestic opposition to the war in the U.S. made America think about why they were in the Vietnam War. When Americans saw photos of the My Lai Massacre like in Source 50 they saw how out of control things were getting in Vietnam. After the massacre people began to protest against war, and the President and government held a meeting and press conference discussing the reasons why America was in Vietnam. Many Americans saw no reason for America being in Vietnam and wanted the war to end and America to get out; the protests were effective in making the President look into the massacre and thinking about why they were in Vietnam. This lost of support made America think about leaving Vietnam and therefor losing the war because it enabled communism to take over Vietnam, which America was trying to prevent.
5. Chinese and Soviet support for the Viet Cong was a huge factor that made America lose the war. The Chinese and Soviet Union sent an immense amount of supplies to the Viet Cong, which greatly helped them to demoralize American soldiers and ultimately win the war. As shown in Source 38, the Chinese absolutely did not want America to be in Vietnam. The caption on the poster says "U.S. Imperialism, Get Out of South Viet Nam," which shows that the Chinese did not want imperialism in South Vietnam or so close to China. Also, since the Soviets wanted to spread communism and saw that Vietnam was trying to become communism they felt that they had to support Vietnam as much as possibly in order to spread their ideology. VIet Cong had a lot of support, but America barely had any. There was very little support from the UN so America was basically on her own. Since Viet Cong had two huge supports and America really didn't have any, the Viet Cong were bound to win.
6. 'But did they really lose?' Summarize the argument put forward in Source 57, and your view on it.
In Source 57 the argument in the text suggests that America had won the Vietnam war, militarily. It goes on about how America didn't lose one major consequential battle, how the fall of Saigon happened two years after America completely evacuated from Vietnam, and how it was Vietnamese civilians and military soldiers running for their lives and not America. One of the supporting points is that during the time when America was in Vietnam they didn't lose one battle; including the Tet Offensive in 1968 saying that it was a VC and NVA loss. Another supporting point was that the fall of Saigon happened two years after America had left; saying that "How could we lose a war that we had already stopped fighting?" Since America wasn't in Vietnam when Saigon fell and 'lost' America didn't lose, Vietnam did. Lastly, America didn't lose the war because it was Vietnamese civilians and soldiers running for their lives when Saigon fell not Americans. Therfore, since no Americans were running for their lives, as if retreating, they didn't lose; but since Vietnamese people were they lost.
I believe that America did lose the war to a certain extent, America lost the war politically but won militarily. America lost politically because Vietnam did succumb to communism and became a communist country, which America went to Vietnam to stop communism from spreading and stop Vietnam from becoming a communist country. However, the Vietnamese lost millions more men and civilians than America had lost. Also, as Source 57 says "American mililtary did not lose a battle of any consequence," which more plainly says that there was no battle that America lost that was significant enough to do damage of some sort. In conclusion, America lost the Vietnam War politically, but won militarily.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Vietname War Opposition
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!"
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!"
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)
