Major Arguments Advanced Against Vietnam War - Literature review Example

Lecturer: MAJOR ARGUMENTS ADVANCED AGAINST VIETNAM WAR Introduction The argument as to whether or not war should be regarded as part of the available options for resolving disputes and making the stand and ideologies of a particular group of people established remains a debate among historians and political scientists. But whatever the situation is, it remains a fact that war continues to be used as one of the options by most political leaders. Wars have been with us, war exists with us, and it is very clear that wars will continue to be with us. The Vietnam War is one such war that happened in history to really fuel the question of the place of war in conflict resolution. This is because that particular war has been noted to have come about as a result of differences in political ideologies between communists and non-communist states (Gettleman, Franklin and Young 65). Even though the actual staging of the war took place between North Vietnam and South Vietnam, each of these sides had their own political allies that backed them for the mere fact that they were either communists or non-communists. In this paper, the question of the place of war in political settlement is further scrutinized with the Vietnam War and through the use of different themes of discussion. Some of these themes would look at the groups involved in the various protests, the impact of bombings on anti-war movement and how the media influenced the war. Protesting groups in the Vietnam War Once the Vietnam War started, there were several protest matches that were staged. Most of these protests were known to have been staged by anti-war movements in the Vietnam and abroad (Terry 67). In most cases also, the protestors were made up of organized and recognized groups such as artists and writers. As a matter of fact, Simkim gives account of series of protest that were part of a movement in opposition of the war that took place in each year from 1962 to 1973. At the most initial stages of the war, there were only a small percentage of people that opposed the war, especially in the United States. For example in the December 1964 march that took place in Washington against the war, it is known for a fact that there were only 25,000 people in the match, even though that macth still constituted the largest anti-war demonstration in the United States as at that time (Simkin). As the war continued and the perceived acts of atrocities and injustice became intense such as the involvement of chemical weapons, the Vietnam Protest Movement got more support and so the protests became more visible and aloud. At the other side of the coin, Gettleman, Franklin and Young 232), also gives accounts of protests that were actually in favour of the war. Such groups were known to have made chants such as “No glory like old glory” whiles those against the war chanted “LBJ, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” (Zinn 490). Impact of bombing of North Vietnam and invasion of Cambodia on anti-war movement Quite notably, the movement against United States’ involvement in the Vietnam War did not have a very massive beginning as it was only prominent among peace activists and other leftist intellectuals on various college campuses in the United States (History.Com). Events such as the bombing of North Vietnam and the invasion of Cambodia were however going to be the major event that opened the floodgate to widespread anti-war movement activity. It is not surprising that unlike the previous years when the most number of anti-war protests that had happened in a single year was 6, which was recorded in 1964, there were as many as 26 different accounts of anti-war movement influenced protests in 1965 when the United States began bombing North Vietnam in full strength (Terry 34). The impact of these two activities on the anti-movement is certainly the high level of justification it gave to the cause of the movement in the eyes of the ordinary citizen of the world as how wrong the position of the United States in the war was. It is not surprising at all that the movement became so loud, heard and appreciated that in 1967 they influenced the setting up of the International War Crimes Tribunal under the leadership of Bertrand Russel, which ruled that America was guilty for using weapons against the Vietnamese that were not allowed in international law (Simkin). Arguments of groups that supported U.S. policy in the Vietnam War Indeed, the war was not all made up of oppositions against it. If it were, the war might certainly not have been fought at all. There were other people who advanced and supported the position of the United States, especially the U.S. policy in the war. As affirmed by Lyndon B. Johnson who was the president at the time following Kennedy’s assassination, the U.S’s policy in the Vietnam was clearly spelt out in the National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) 273 which stated that the U.S was in the war to “contest against the externally directed and supported communist conspiracy” (Anderson 124). This means that the group that supported the U.S policy supported a policy that was basically ensuring that no group of communists such as China and Soviet Union came through the backdoor to breed the growth and advancement of the communist conspiracy. As a fierce opposition to communism, the U.S. was not going to allow its position on anti-communism to be overtaken in what would have been more of a biased and unfair engagement from the communist support (OConnell 72). What is more, the group supported the U.S. stand and policy which defined the Vietnam War as nothing more than a North Vietnamese aggression against the South (Anderson 133). How television coverage advanced the anti-war movement There continues to be debate as to whether the media coverage given to the Vietnam War, especially television coverage was a positive thing or a negative thing. This is because there are two schools of thoughts, with the first arguing that events such as the live shooting of people in the head on television was barbaric and gave a negative image about Vietnam as a country (Gettleman, Franklin and Young 35). There is another school of thought that believes that but for the exclusive coverage given to the war, the world would not have come to appreciate how bad it was for the U.S. to be involved in the war and most of its actions such as the bombing of North Vietnam and the invasion of Cambodia (Gettleman, Franklin and Young 32). The anti-war movement was one group that believed that the television coverage were a positive development because it helped in drawing more support for the anti-war movement and made the message of the movement highly visible and audible. Historically, it would be noted that the war started with the media reporters not getting into the middle of the war (Terry 132). These were the early years and the overall output of the anti-war movement was very low at this point. But once the reporters took a center stage and started going to the middle of the war, the number of support for the movement began going up by the day (OConnell 41). Conclusion From the actions of various protest and anti-war groups against the Vietnam War, there is a very clear and convincing conclusion that can be drawn and this conclusion is that war is certainly not the best option for settling any issues or disputes, whether these are intra-national or inter-national. Even though war as a phenomenon may never end, it is important to always push for peace and use dialogue. The place of war should be the last resort but even in this, there should be sufficient thinking on weighing out the benefits and disadvantages of resorting to the use of war seeking political redress. Once the war in Vietnam ended, there was much development and progress in that country than the time of the war or even before. This emphasises the logic in the position that was taken by the anti-war movement right from the onset of the war Cited Works Anderson L David. The Oxford Companion to American Military History. New York: Oxford UP. 1999. Print. Gettleman, Marvin E.; Franklin, Jane; Young, Marilyn. Vietnam and America: A Documented History. Toronto: Ultimate Press. 1995. Print. History.Com. Vietnam War Protests. 2013. Web. 20th February 2014 Neale, Jonathan. The American War: Vietnam, 1960–1975. London: Bookmarks. 2001. Print. OConnell, Kim A. Primary Source Accounts of the Vietnam War. New Jersey: Berkeley Heights. 2006. Print. Simkin, John. Vietnam Protest Movement. Web. 2012. 21st February 2014 Terry, Wallace. An Oral History of the Vietnam War by Black Veterans. New York: Penguin Press. 1984. Print. Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. New York: HarperCollins Publishers. 2003. Print. Annotated Bibliography Anderson L David. The Oxford Companion to American Military History. New York: Oxford UP. 1999. Print. The source is a compilation of events that have taken place in the American Military History. It has thus been published as a companion for modern day military personnel who want to have a fair idea about what existed in history as far as the American Military is concerned. The source is considered valid as it uses both primary and secondary accounts of events that happened in history. By using primary account, it means the author took the pain to collect data from people and places that were directly involved in the various acts of history. The secondary sources also serve as a critique to the various sources that were collected from primary sources, using modern day literary approaches. This source was selected was the work in relation to its ability to critically answer questions on the themes of protesting groups in the Vietnam War. Contents of the book cover accounts from scholars who had interacted with protesters who were directly involved in the protests in one way or the other. Neale, Jonathan. The American War: Vietnam, 1960–1975. London: Bookmarks. 2001. Print. This is a book that gives very comprehensive secondary reportage on the Vietnam War from an American perspective. It is for this reason the author titled the war as being an “American War”. The validity of the source is in the fact that the author has been regarded as an authority in military review, whose writings include several published works by Bookmarks in London and other credible publishers. The main reason for selecting this source was because the writer gives an American reportage on the war as neutral observer. The writer is seen as a neutral mind because he is neither an American not a Vietnamese. This way, the likelihood that the writer will take any side on the issue is unlikely. The source was also included to give vivid account on the theme of how television coverage influenced the activities of the anti-war activists. This is because reporting from a neutral ground, one of the best sources the author had was the television. OConnell, Kim A. Primary Source Accounts of the Vietnam War. New Jersey: Berkeley Heights. 2006. Print. This source is a reprint of various primary sources taken on the Vietnam War. It is for this reason the writer tags the work as a “primary source accounts of the Vietnam War”. The accounts given in this book are regarded as primary accounts because the researcher based all events and reports on personal interviews conducted with people directly involved in the war. At other points, the researcher took written evidence from primary sources such as letters and telegrams that were sent from one person to the other during the war. The primary nature of the sources gave the source much credibility because it took the task of being judgmental in reportage from the writer to the reader. The book was used for two major themes of the work, which were the position held by people who supported the U.S. policy on the Vietnam War and impact of the North Vietnam bombing. Indeed, the book’s accounts were very open ended and discerning into the issues, making it possible for the reader to make several decisions regarding the rightness or wrongness of positions held by parties in war. Read More