Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Why was the US in Vietnam?

"Our objective is the independence of South Vietnam and its freedom from attack.  We want nothing for ourselves--only that the people of South Vietnam be allowed to guide their own country in its own way." -- Lyndon Johnson, April 7, 1965

This is LBJ's justification to the American public regarding the US escalation in Vietnam.  How do you assess this statement?  What are some of the objectives that you see behind the Vietnam conflict that Johnson did not mention here?

16 comments:

  1. In Chief of Staff's memorandum, I specifically see the underlying motive to keep a "winning" reputation. #8 details that they were going to escalate the war because they no longer wanted to be "fighting the war on the enemy's terms." Maybe one of the US's goals throughout this was to prove themselves as the top dog country, therefore backing down was not an option. Johnson's justification for involvement is honestly just annoying because it is kind of common sense that we were not in Vietnam just to be nice and try to support the people who they have "pledged" to defend. It seems like he wants to conceal his intentions because he doesn't want to be hated by the people, but people were already against involvement so I am not sure why he still chooses to justify the US involvement in this petty manner.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This statement by Lyndon Johnson, was made in order to subdue the American peoples rising concern about the what was happening in Vietnam. Johnson made America look likes the “good guys” saying that we wanted nothing for ourselves, only to maintain peace. As Dean mentioned, in number 8 of the memorandum, the chairman of the joint Chief of Staff, General Maxwell D, discusses how America has been put on the defensive, that we are only reacting to what is being thrown our way. Our defensive nature has the ability for America to come off as weak. This would encourage our enemies, “ to higher levels of vigor and greater risks.” Another objective, number 10, discusses how the U.S. military commander should have complete control over the U.S. army as well as, “complete responsibility for conduct of the program against North Vietnam.” I believe that the underlying objective behind the Vietnam conflict was, as General Maxwell D said, “70% to avoid a humiliating U.S. defeat, 20% to keep South Vietnamese territory from the Chinese, and 10% to permit people of south Vietnam to enjoy a better, freer way of life.”

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the US participated in Vietnam War because of other reason, not like the statements said "we want nothing for ourselves". As we know that Eisenhower propositioned anti--communism and extreme diplomacy, and I think the reason that the US fought Vietnam because half Vietnam was supported by some communism countries such as China and Soviet Union, and it might be good chance to demonstrate anti-communism by defeating North Vietnam. As suggested in the material, the US "must make ready to conduct increasingly bolder actions in southern Asia"(#10) and "the failure of our programs in South Vietnam... influence in the judgments of... with respect to US" (#4) and "the economic and agricultural disappointments suffered by Communist China, plus the current rift with the Soviets, could cause the communists to think twice about undertaking a large-scale military adventure in Southeast Asia" (#8). According to those materials it is clear that the US fought in Vietnam more for its respect and world power and ambitions.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that LBJ made this statement because he was getting so much heat for entering a war where we could not win anything so he was trying to play the sympathy card in a way saying that we were doing this for the people of South Vietnam and not for ourselves. I think one of the main reasons we wanted to enter the conflict is because we wanted to show off our super power status. At the time everyone kind of saw Vietnam as a somewhat a weeklong in the eastern part of the globe which let communism introduce itself the the northern state of Vietnam. When we entered we had no idea about the underground warfare and this eventually lead to us leaving and people seeing us as loosing the way.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think LBJ made this statement for all the criticism that was going towards the war. He knew that we went into the war on false pretenses, so basically there was nothing to win or gain. The only reason we entered the war is because of the supreme anti-communist beliefs of members of the government. They were so afraid of communism, and wanted to stop the spread so badly, they went into Vietnam because they really believed it would help the cause. And not only that, if we could go into another country, and repress communism, it would be a symbol of our military power, and enhance our status. So it wasn't just for the stopping of communism, but it was a power move. LBJ was wrong when he said "we don't want anything for ourselves." You wouldn't go into a country for no reason, and get nothing in return. The government had a clear goal in mind, but their vision of reality was diluted.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think this statement made by President Johnson is one of total bullshit and the stereotypical flowery, meaningless responses we get from politicians all the time. We wanted influence in Vietnam and in the surrounding South East Asia to carry out our own will. We wanted to stop Communism in its tracks and spread our own ideas about government instead. The only purpose of this statement by LBJ was to get the american public to stop hating him so much for sending their children to the humid jungles of Vietnam where everyone was getting massacred by underground Viet-Cong guerrilla fighters. The government also tried to construe the war as something we HAD to get involved in as if its outcome directly affected the US

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lyndon Johnson was trying to act like there were not behind all this and wanted peace. But he's just saying this because of communism he believes if it is not stopped in Vietnam it will spread to America. When it says, "We want nothing for ourselves--only that the people of South Vietnam be allowed to guide their own country" But I do not think this is true because America is trying to guide Vietnam and they want communism to be gone.

    ReplyDelete
  8. In this statement, all Johnson is really doing is justifying his actions to the public about why we are in the war with Vietnam. I agree with Lauren when she said that he is making American out to sound like the "good guys" because that is essentially what he is saying when he goes on to say that he doesn't want anything for himself, he is just doing this all out of the goodness of his heart and truly just want the Southern Vietnam people to govern themselves. However, we know that the Vietnam was was a very cruel and harsh war with child snipers that the American soldiers were forced to kill and much more, and because Johnson doesn't go into any detail about that it seems as though all he wants to do is keep the people of America in the dark and make them believe that America is doing this out of the goodness of our hearts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. LBJ's justification to the American public regarding the US escalation in Vietnam is saying that we are being unselfish by helping other countries to be able to have the freedom and rights that we have. Hes saying we are doing South Vietnam a service by going in and helping the people of that country to be the best that it can be and run the way the people want it to run. SOme conflicts he didn't mention are if people even want us to intervene in the first place, and if we're not gaining anything should we even intervene because the people might not even want us in the first place, which would mean we were doing more bad than good. They didn't mention many of the more conflicting reasons as to why we should not go, basically the other side of the argument.

    ReplyDelete
  10. LBJ's statement is very altruistic and paints us in a positive light. Sadly, it could not be further from the truth. The government could care less about South Vietnamese freedom and autonomy. We promised to hold an election in Vietnam, but when we saw that the communist Ho Chi Minh would surely win, we cancelled it. Even the South Vietnamese were not adamant about their freedom. Our military leaders thought that the ASVN would fight valiantly for the freedom of their people against the communist NVA, but they did not.
    The government was much more truthful in private than it was to the public. The Secretary of Defense stated in an government memorandum that the "US war aims were 70%- to avoid a humiliating US defeat (to our reputation as a guarantor), 20%- to keep South Vietnam (and the adjacent) territory from Chinese hands, 10%- to permit the people of South Vietnam to enjoy a better, freer way of life. Also- to emerge from crisis without unacceptable taint from methods used. Not- to help a friend." LBJ only mentioned the charitable goal, and not the far more important selfish goals in Vietnam that would not warrant the deaths of so many American lives.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This statement makes it seem as if the US was so innocent and all they wanted was to help Vietnam to be independent and become a freed country. However, the main objective behind this that he does not mention in his speech directly is that the US wanted to stop communism from spreading even more and that is why they were interviening in all the Asian countries one by one. They also wanted to show and emphasize how the US was a capitalist and democratic country and their strength and power to the world and maybe scare some countries. This does not mean that they did not want to actually help Vietnam, but rather that there were other objectives.

    ReplyDelete
  12. LBJ's statement is demagogic and is intended to justify U.S.'s military intervention in Vietnam. LBJ portrays U.S. as a peace/freedom protector. However, his specious statement belies his true intentions. As the article has mentioned, 70% of the war aim is to defend U.S.'s reputation; 20% of the aim is to keep Vietnam away from China; the last 10% of the goal is to maintain Vietnam's freedom. Basically, what LBJ claims is just a byproduct of the Vietnam War. The reason LBJ is putting overwhelming forces into Vietnam is partially for his own reputation. He does not want to be the first president to lose to Communism. Furthermore, the war also shows U.S.'s resolution on containing Communism.

    ReplyDelete
  13. In the statement above, LBJ was just justifying his actions and putting the United States in the positive side. Even though LBJ stated that the United State only want for "the people of South Vietnam be allowed to guide their own country in its own way.", the statement was obviously not true. The fact that United States cancelled the election in Vietnam when it was sure that Ho Chi Min would be elected exemplifies the point. Based on the material, the United States was in Vietnam because of its anti-communist goals, in order to keep the South Vietnam from China and in order to defend the reputation of the United States as a super power.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I believe this statement was made to calm down the attack against his decision to help Vietnam. This quote seems to be doing two very important things: one, addressing the war and how the US was involved but at the same time, distancing itself from the problem. The quote states, "to help them" which in a way detached the US from the war. Through this quote the US is not only made to seem a hero (a country that is willing to put itself at risk for the good of the world, the prevention of the spread of Communism) but also to say "hey, we are only helping we are not overly involved in this war." He made this statement because of the huge anger about the war, many people felt it was not the US's problem to go in and intervene and he was just trying to calm this rush.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Of course Lyndon Johnson would say that. Although this war was not initiated by him, he was pro-Vietnam War. He wanted to fight in the war. I am sure he is not that stupid to send American men's life to death for some random Asian country's freedom as he said. With no doubt, it was just to get support of the American people. President Johnson had his own objective that if he explicitly said it, he would not get American people's support because what civilian care about is a good stable life which Vietnam War created more dead bodies. Johnson as a politician, his son didn't had to fight in war. He didn't need to directly scarifies. Therefore he pro-war for this ambition.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This statement spoken by Lyndon Johnson, specifically states that we want the freedom for South Vietnam so that they are not influenced or exposed to communism, and can have theirown government. Johnson wanted to gain the support and confront the war and inform what the role of the US was. Johnson did a great job in trying to distance himself from the war. I think there were two sides to the mindset of the Americans. One would be they wanted to seem innocent in trying to help the Vietnamese people, but also the second would be trying to stop the spread of communism. Some objectives that are seen behind the Vietnam conflict that Johnson did not mention is are we gaining anything by intervening?

    ReplyDelete