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.

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!"

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 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.

The U.S. Enters the Vietnam War

1. Many neutral observers in Vietnam were critical of US policy. Explain why.

Many neutral observers in Vietnam were critical of US policy because the leader the American government supported, Ngo Dinh Diem, was strongly against communism and would exile any communist. Also, Diem was very disrespectful of the Budhist religion, which most of the peasants of Vietnam were Budhists. Since he was disrespectful of Budhism there were protests like in Source 33 where a Budhist priest lit himself on fire, they protested against the attacks the government made against the Budhist shrines. However, the United States continued to support him, like sending him over a billion dollars, until he was thrown out by his own army leaders. Unfortunately the government remained corrupt, but America still supported it because they were afraid of Ho Chi Minh coming into reign who is communists. Overall, the neural observers in Vietnam did not like what the United States was doing, they were intimidated, discriminated against, and faced a lot of violence. This lead to the people seeking liberation from the South, they became strong supporters of communism and Ho Chi Mihn.

2. Explain how US politicians would have defended their policies.

The US politicians would have defended their policies by saying that they were trying to contain communism and they didn't know of any one who was better than Ngo Dinh Diem. The US went to Diem because they knew he was strongly anti-communists and would kick out any communist from the country. They supported him immensely because the United States was desperate to keep communism from spreading. They believed in this "Domino effect" where they thought that the Soviets would just go from one country to another and spread communism, like one after another in dominoes. If the United States had known a better leader they probably would have supported that person than Diem, but this is just what they said and we don't know if they would have done that for sure.

3. The following events are not listed in correct date order. Place them in the correct chronological order. (Write the year inside the parenthesis, i.e. (1965). Then note the reason for each U.S. action, and how it brought the U.S. into deeper involvement in Vietnam.
The reasons you can choose from are: No direct involvement; financial support; political involvement; military involvement. Also, note what events triggered the increased involvement.

(1954) U.S. stops elections in Vietnam, reason: political involvement because Mihn was getting help from China and afraid of Vietnam becoming communist. To keep the 'no elections' going America had to stay there and make sure that Vietnam wasn't turning communist.
(1955) Formation of South Vietnam, reason: political involvement and financial support because again Mihn was anti-communist, would throw out any communist from the country, and US didn't want a communist leader and government in Vietnam. Brought America deeper becaues they had to continue to fund and support Mihn, which made them stay in Vietnam.
(1960) Viet Cong formed, reason: no direct involvement. Brought America deeper because they saw that VIetnam was turning communist.
(1960-1962) Viet Cong attacks on U.S. and South Vietnam bases, reason: no direct involvement. This action made by Viet Cong made America have to fight back and become militarily involved, which brought America deeper into the conflict because now they were basically fighting against them and about to get into a war.
(1962) JFK sends military advisers, reason: military involvement. The Viet Cong were attacking and the 'advisers' were there to fight back, which definitely brought America deeper into conflict because now they were fighting against some of the people.
(1962) Number of 'advisers' reaches over 11,500, reason: military involvement and political involvement. This was triggered by the Viet Cong air base incidenct and the attacks that they were making. President Kennedy sent more troops to fight against the Viet Cong and to 'contain' communism, or keep communism from spreading.
(1963) U.S. supports South Vietnam government after army overthrow Diem, reason: no direct involvement. However, the U.S. continued to support them because they were still anti-communists, which brought America deeper into conflict because they were still trying to contain communism and were still supporting them.
(1963) Assassination of JFK-Johnson becomes president, reason: no direct involvement, this isn't related to Vietnam but there was an affect. Once Johnson became president he declares war or starts a war in Vietnam, which immensely puts America deeper in conflict but now they are actually in the conflict.
(1964) Gulf of Tonkin Incident, reason: military involvement, the Vietnamese fired first but this made Congress angry and quickly passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution which gave all the decision making on what to do next militarily to Johnson. This brought America deeper into conflict because now America was really fighting back.
(1965) U.S. Marines land at Da Nang, reason: military involvement, this was the start of the Vietnam War. It was ignited after the Vietnamese fired on America in the Gulf of Tonkin, and this was the deepest America could go into the conflict because now they were actually in the conflict.

4. Choose two events that you think were critical in getting the U.S. involved in a war in Vietnam. Explain
your choice.

One event that lead to the U.S. getting involved in the Vietnam war was supporting Diem. When Diem was in reign there were serious protests and the U.S. didn't do anything, they just wanted to keep communism out. However, Diem and the support for Diem lead to Viet Cong and most of the people turning to Mihn and communism. After this there was no going back for America, they were too determined to keep communism out. Another evvent that lead the U.S. into getting involved din the Vietnam war was the Gulf of Tonkin incident. After this it set America off, they were determined to get rid of the pro-communists Viet Cong and Congress quickyl passed the Gulf Tonkin Resolution. This resolution gave of military power to President Johnson where obviously he would start a war with Vietnam, and he did. President Johnson sent troops to Da Nang which officially started the war.