American experience in Vietnam - Essay Example

?1Learning from one’s previous mistakes does not necessarily apply to all. Determination may drive one towards a goal no matter the price to be paid as was with Kennedy john. In his quest to unite citizens to vote him in, he used similar terms that had caused destruction aiding the majority to end up in Vietnam, and we all know what took tall of that. But as it is with politicians they give their citizens what they want to hear. This is what Kennedy was doing to convince his listeners and lure those who were not in his support. The vice president by then, though it took them long to notice and admit admitted that they had been ignorant of all that had happened in Vietnam. All those taking part in war had their own reasons for fighting, but did not include lands, resources nor dominations but freedom was the justice they were seeking in their quest neither did their want to lose their colonies in the southern east Asia. Greed and selfishness is a much greater drive for to those with interest to grab what they want. Being involved in a soviet union war meant that they were not in only in a battle of superiority, but were competing for ideas. Winthrop’s John myth citing the idea of a new America that was godlier would vanquish their numerically stronger enemies. They had dismissed the thought of having a stronger warrior squad that would outdo those of their enemies citing it as ancient. The Vietnam presidents by now relied more on virtue but not power in order to carry the day by winning the war. (Westheider 2008) 2 Industrialization got a boost from the farmers from the eighteenth century. This fueled the power of Americans in terms of their organization, and no other a power could outdo them. This proved that they were militarily invisible and after what took place in Hiroshima it was more evident that they were morally superior but the most powerful country in history. In their mind, they knew nobody could beat them in war even if nations joined to fight against them. This is where they went wrong and so writes Miller Arthur, that he believed in America and believed they had technology till the mid 1960’s when he thought they would never accept defeat as they had technologically advanced. The thought of American’s military being conquered in the battlefield with the advanced technology, grown industrialization and technology ability made them think they would never have been insufficient for war and its purposes. With the Soviet Union exploding a bomb as the Americans were not expectant off. Their aim was entirely to come up with means to fight as they avoided nuclear technology. Its premise was that soviets and their team were to indulge in small wars and without provoking or unlocking nuclear energy. In 1945 as they marked the end of the World War 2, Vietnam was left with vivid memories of subordination caused by Japanese and French authority replacing de facto. The moral lessons were western colonialism wasn’t omnipotent, and no name would replace imperialism as it was all the same from all round and equally dangerous.( Sevy 1989) American both political and leaders in businesses had an agreement that they needed to breathe both life and energy from the world system, and the only country 3that had the capacity to see them done was America. The key role would be played by political entrance to enact the law through the help of police men. There was a need for coordination of world affairs in the whole worlds system. Britain withdrew in the 19th century. This made Americans eager on taking on the lead as they believed they were able. Their main task was to restore expansiveness in their economy in their quest to increase their productivity as it was devastated by war. However, the imbalance within the system of the world was the major issue. Despite Americans capitalism being so strong, it didn’t quite matter as that of others countries was too weak. (Dougan,1988) But why all this, there were no raw materials in Vietnam to exploit neither were there strategic interests, it’s evident that their act was that off an imperialist aggressor. As the war was closely fading, oil was discovered in Vietnam, and this fact led to a conclusion by antiwar radicals sitting that it had been the main reason why as to why Americans had been there. But this was not the case as both leaders back then never knew anything to do with oil and mostly because back in the days it wasn’t doing so well going for two dollars a barrel. Their main aim was to discredit their enemies morally there were psychological interpretations that encouraged the deal of anti-communism especially in the underdeveloped countries. Vietnam was a victim and this would signal rise in communism marking capitalism’s end as a world order marking out America no longer the country under which the worlds of civilization were to be based. (Kinnard 1991) 4Legacy had various aspects and among them were sensitivity and vulnerability of the democratic administrations on the issues of the Far East. These new administrations would inherit a linked perception of China’s numbers, vastness, and its belligellance and revived senses of the golden horde. Macpherson Marya weighs the experiences both men and women who took part in war with those of their peers that didn’t participate. Through this we can conclude that what she tries to say is that the veterans were not mature enough nor did they learn anything. The spiritual ordeal of veterans is analyzed by Marin Peter as he compares their development morally as they come into terms with the immoral indifference in America thus fading the recognition of veterans. The sociological analysis describing the disintegration of veterans is told by Gabriel A Richard and Savage L Paul. They emphasize on integrity, character, and competence of the officers and the effects brought about by corruption as a result of change in leadership styles. Currey B Cecil criticizes the military for blaming citizens, press and politicians for whatever happened in Vietnam. They should come into terms with their own mistakes and not trying to work on erasing the structure of command they deployed in Vietnam. Veterans at a certain point saw no point of the war and from time to time they asked and discussed amongst themselves why they were fighting. However, they were differences between other wars and that of Vietnam. Among them were, the element of the antiwar was paramount among others. Complete safety was maintained as it said that those who served in war only three out of five saw action. (Dougan, 1988) This war was supposed to change the nature of men both veterans and citizens, but was not the case. It took them much time to come into terms with this and understand, practice and among all appreciates what had taken place, and its significance to enable them move forward. References Westheider, James E.. The African American experience in Vietnam: brothers in arms. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008. Sevy, Grace. The American experience in Vietnam: a reader. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1989. Kinnard, Douglas. The certain trumpet: Maxwell Taylor & the American experience in Vietnam. Washington: Brassey's (US), 1991. Dougan, Clark, and Stephen Weiss. The American experience in Vietnam. [1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton ;, 1988. Read More