...Why was the USA unable to defeat communism in south-east Asia in the years 1965-1973? The question is often raised on what basis was the USA unable to defeat communism in south-east Asia in the years 1965-1973. It is debated upon many reasons as to why this happened. The US may have lacked the will to win this battle, and so their loss was a result of this. More specifically, the US presidents, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon have been thought to have been less enthusiastic uninvolved during the cold war. In addition, the US tactics were frowned upon, being said that they were not intelligently layer out, and so they were defeated. Also, the support of two very strong countries, China and USSR, backed north Vietnam a great deal. USA failed to win the hearts and minds of the north Vietnamese, also failing to understand the situation. Diem was an unpopular individual, Ho Chi Minh was a praised and trustworthy character for the Vietnamese. I will examine the factors resulting the loss for the US, and extract the reason behind it. The type of US soldiers sent to Vietnam to fight are a factor for the loss of USA’s loss of the war. A number of the front line troops were conscripts and not professional troops. They were young, usually from lower social groups and frequently from Americas minority groups. These troops were usually trained in conventional warfare whereas the Viet Cog used guerrilla tactics-hitting the enemy and then running away; not wearing a standard uniform;...
Words: 974 - Pages: 4
...successful was the USA’s policy of containment? The policy of containment was not a success, As after the war, The USA aimed to quarantine communism to the only place it existed, Russia. However soon despite this, communism spread and communist dictatorship controlled most of Eastern Europe, soon after this the most populated state on earth, China, fell to a communist regime, as well as the creation of communist states in Vietnam and Korea. This consistent creation of communist states and the failure of the USA to prevent this, shows how ultimately, despite apparent success in some of Europe and Asia, the Policy of Containment failed in its primary function, to contain and prevent the spread of communism and therefore it was not a success. However it is arguable that in some ways the USA’s Policy of Containment was a great success in preventing the spread of communism early on during the Cold War. One piece of evidence that supports the argument that the USA had early success with their policy of containment is The Greek Civil War. The USA’s decision to intervene due to the “strategic significance of Greece in the Balkans and the Mediterranean” arguably was successful. With this clear threat of communist expansion into Western Europe, Truman called for congress to uphold the Truman Doctrine and provide funding to aid the battle against the spread of communism that clearly threatened the USA’s interests in Europe. This resulted in $400 million dollars of funding being provided...
Words: 2612 - Pages: 11
...Why did the USA get involved in Asia in 1950? (30) After the end of the Second World War, the two war time allies the USA and Soviet Union became involved in a war of ideologies, the cold war. The US saw communism as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Therefore the US set out a new foreign policy, the policy of containment, in the Truman doctrine. There were however other reasons for the USA’s involvement such as their military confidence, UN agreement, domestic pressure which called for Truman to be more tough on communism and their economic interest in Japan which led to the US government’s decision to intervene in the Korean War. One of the main reasons for the US’s involvement was due to the ‘Policy of Containment’. The aim was for the USA to work with its allies to contain the spread of communism in eastern Europe and Asia using political, economic and if necessary military pressure to prevent the spread of the every growing ideology of communism. The US’s main worry was the communism would spread as most of the eastern European countries were devastated by the war were weak and communism could easily spread through these weakened countries such as Hungary. Europe was divided by ‘an Iron curtain’, the west with capitalism views, and the east with growing communism views. Furthermore, China had fallen to Communism under Mao, which may have been a huge wake up call for President Truman. In addition, Mao had signed the treaty of friendship with Stalin; therefore the spread...
Words: 896 - Pages: 4
...War between USA with South Vietnam and North Vietnam with Viet Cong had lasted about 10 years and had many significant consequences. Therefore, it’s one of the most important wars in the recent years and has possessed many resonances so far. It is an unforgettable war for the USA because it has unexpectedly lost the war. The USA has lost the war against a fragile,undeveloped country which is North Vietnam. USA has lost the war against a fragile,undeveloped country which is North Vietnam. There has been a lot of controversies about this war so far. These controversies are concentrated on the moral dimension of the war. In other words, the experts and the analysts are concerned about whether this war is just or not. The Vietnam War can’t be considered as just war when we evaluate it with the aid of the Jus Ad Bellum critters. It doesn’t meet the 6 critters such as just cause, comparative justice, legitimate authority, right intention, probability of success and last resort. First of all, the USA doesn’t have a just cause to declare a war against North Vietnam and Viet Cong. In this war, USA struggles against communism and wants to terminate the so-called dangerous activities of the North Vietnam and Viet Cong founded by Ho Min Cinh in South Vietnam. USA doesn’t correct a suffered wrong here although it regards communism as great public evil. Western countries which adopt liberalism disapprove communism and they think that communism have to be removed. In this war, USA exactly does...
Words: 2328 - Pages: 10
...Was the Korean War a turning point in the Civil War? The Korean War was thus a turning point in the development of the Cold War in that it marked a shift in the focal point in the development of tensions, from Europe to East Asia, with many indirect conflicts being largely confined to Europe. The Korean War was the first time that communism and capitalism were to fight against each other. It was hence a turning point in the development of the Cold War — instead of tensions developing between the two countries directly, the conflicts are now manifested through a proxy, which is Korea. This not only altered the field of rivalry between the two superpowers from Europe to Asia, but also changed the method through which the two powers conflicted. While the Cold War in Europe was "fought" mainly through all means short of direct armed confrontation, the Korean War saw the escalation of the conflict to a "hot war”. The idea of puppet states emphasized that the Korean War conflict was merely the Cold War fought on another front, with USSR and USA in control. It is also evident that the two superpowers were control in Korea. The US manipulated the United Nations (which was a first real test) so as to send a mostly American force into the region to address its strategic goals of preventing a possible domino effect and executing NSC-68. Stalin’s limited aid and lack of restraint against Kim also led to the prolonging of the war, but could also be seen as Stalin being hesitant to become...
Words: 707 - Pages: 3
...The War of Vietnam Social Science Mr. Thompson 03/25/2014 Why did the USA become increasingly involved in the war of Vietnam? There are many reason why America got involved in the war of Vietnam. The countries Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia were then called the French Indochina. This is because the French had conquered the area before in the 19th century. The French indo china was wanted by the French, because of its materials like rubber, coal and rice. Also Vietnam was the world’s third biggest grower of rice. However, because of these new materials Japan wanted to conquer this too. They took time and waited for the right time to go and attack Vietnam. This finally came down to the year 1940 when France was defeated by the Germans. So Japan went into Vietnam and started taking out what they wanted. In 1940 the French were defeated by the Japanese. Therefore, it meant that Japan had control over the French indo china. This then expanded the Japanese empire even more. Japan had hoped to keep the French indo china but by the end of the Second World War 1945 the French had returned to reoccupy the territory they had lost earlier. In August 1945 the French had defeated the Japanese and took back what was their’s. This couldn’t have been done without the support of the USA. The Japanese got rid of the French and then the Americans got rid of the Japanese. This meant that the Vietnamese was the only military force left in Vietnam. Vietminh are the Vietnamese fighting for the independence...
Words: 986 - Pages: 4
...Why did the relationship between the two superpowers deteriorate at the end of the 2nd World War? The end of the 2nd world war brought a huge change in the relationship between the two superpowers, the USA and the USSR, however early underlying ideological factors may have led to an alliance and strong friendship after the war always being unlikely. The complete contrast of a Communism system, adopted by the USSR, and a Capitalism system, adopted by the USA, was a huge underlying ideological factor that hindered the relationship between the two superpowers not only at the end of the 2nd world war, but also very early on in their relationship. The Russian Revolution could be seen as the starting point of this contrast in societies between the superpowers, as it highlighted the first communism vs. capitalism divide. Communism was viewed by many governments in the west of Europe as a highly destabilising force, and they began to build a pre-conception of communism and the countries that adopt communism. The Economies and Political systems differed hugely between the communist and capitalist societies, for example in capitalist economies the incentive of individual gain was a direct contrast to the community responsibility encouraged by communism, and therefore any possible solutions to help re-build countries such as Germany after the end of the 2nd world war that suit both superpowers societies successfully would have been near enough impossible. It was not only the Communist/Capitalist...
Words: 1310 - Pages: 6
...To what extent were rival ideologies responsible for the breakdown of the relationship between the two superpowers between 1945 and 1949? It was the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan that really split Europe and made the concept of an Iron Curtain permanent during 1947/8. It was the final breakdown of the Allied cooperation over Germany that led to tensions and permanent divisions in the centre of Europe in 1948/9 as witnessed by the Berlin blockade and Allied airlift. It was the explosion of the Soviet atom bomb and American membership of NATO that created a bi-polar nuclear world during and after 1949. rival ideologies Under President Woodrow Wilson the US had committed itself to liberal internationalism, which promoted democracy and the free enterprise system, while the communist emphasis was upon a world wide class revolution to bring about the socialist future. These conflicting views were less important in the 1920s and 1930s because the Soviet Union was a weak military power and the main threat seemed to come from the right wing ideology of Fascism. However the defeat of these powers by 1945 reopened the ideological sense of difference between the Americans and Russians. hard line anti-Russian views became more influential in Washington by 1945 and George Kennan’s famous “Long Telegram” in 1946 also reinforced the idea that the communists were ideologically hostile to US interests and needed to be contained. Although...
Words: 1959 - Pages: 8
...How far do you agree that the origins of the Cold War were mainly due to Stalin´s foreign policy of expansionism? Soviet actions after 1945 were seen in the West as part of a concerned attempt to expand the communist world. The collapse of Nazi Germany in 1945 had left a power vacuum in large part of central and Eastern Europe which Stalin, using the presence of the Red Army, took advantage of in order to strengthen the position of the USSR and spread communism. When looking at the events of the early years of the Cold War there would seem to be much evidence to support this. Development of the Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for its outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion, use of Red Army and inability to uphold agreements. However, for a war of any king to develop, there is always more than one party involved and the USA and its President Harry Truman could also be said to have contributed to the development of the Cold War; partly because of being aggressive to Stalin- taking an Iron Fist on dealings with Russia through polices such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan. Issues such as Britain and Churchill´s Iron Curtain Speech can also be seen as hindering relations between the two superpowers in the Cold War, and therefore playing a role in its development. ...
Words: 1779 - Pages: 8
...The USA increasingly became involved in the conflict in Vietnam after 1949. There are several reasons to explain this involvement and furthermore, these reasons will change between 1949 and Johnson’s deployment of troops in 1965. The fundamental reason to explain US involvement in Vietnam throughout this time period is the belief that communism was a threat to the capitalist state of America. President Truman was an anti-Communist and he has introduced the Truman Doctrine, a pledge to remove communism from Europe and aiming to stop communism from spreading any further. Kennan outlined Soviet belief and practice and proposed the policy of containment. With the Soviet’s domination of Eastern Europe in the Cold War such as setting up ‘buffer states’ in Poland, Romania etc. , the set up of Cominform and the blockade of Berlin to abandon control of West Germany. It was showing a major threat to the US. This fear of the threat posed by communism was exacerbated by the events of 1949 when China became a Communist state and the USSR exploded its first own nuclear bomb that the USA was no longer the only nuclear power. These two events prompted the USA to reconsider their policy towards containing communism. US policy now had to be more globally and militarily prepared to stop communism from spreading in Asia countries and even the world. This meant that the growing strength of the Vietminh in North Vietnam could not be ignored as it was believed that if one country fell to communism...
Words: 564 - Pages: 3
...of influence’; ‘expanding Communism’. The traditional, or orthodox, view of the Cold War is that it started because of Soviet expansion into Eastern Europe after WWII. The orthodox view places blame for the Cold War firmly on the Soviets, and claims that the mutual buildup of arms, the espionage, and all the other stuff was just the West responding to the Soviets enlarging their area of influence and exercising influence on the governments behind the Iron Curtain. However, Stalin stated precisely that his desire was to create security for the Soviet Union, based on previous invasions from the West, especially from Germany, who crippled the country twice. It was merely a case of USA versus the Soviet Union, and Britain playing more of a supporting role for the US. The ideologies in conflict were Communism versus Capitalism/democracy, again between the two huge superpowers. Nonetheless, it could also be argued that personalities had been the prime cause. Before Truman became president and Attlee Prime Minister, Churchill and Roosevelt were in post. They were considerably easy with Stalin, and were willing to make ‘arrangements’ to meet his needs. And by many this was considered dangerous for Western countries as the threat of communism was potential. Thus, Truman became president and was much tougher in his approach (similarly Attlee), and according to post-revisionists, he was caused the Cold war to develop. Truman was determined to contain Communism as much as possible, and not...
Words: 1436 - Pages: 6
...Development of the Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for it’s outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion, use of Red Army and inability to uphold agreements. However for a war of any kind to develop there is always more than one party involved and the USA and it’s president Truman could also be said to have contributed to the developing of Cold War, arguably being equally aggressive as Stalin – taking an Iron fist on dealings with Russia through policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, as well as his direction over the US involvement in the Korean War. However issues such as Britain and Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech, as well as the birth of McCarthyism in America, can also be seen as hindering relations between the two superpowers of the Cold War and therefore playing a role in it’s development. Whether Stalin was to blame for the Cold War can also be judged and evaluated through the use of sources, offering a number of interpretations, from extreme Orthodox and Revisionist views to the more diplomatic reasonings of the post revisionist stance. It is correct to say that development of the Cold War, between 1945 and 50, was definitely impacted and heightened through provocative, and at times, aggressive actions on foreign policy, taken by Stalin. An example...
Words: 3132 - Pages: 13
...The Cold War lasted from 1947 to 1991, that is approximately 45 years. People have heard all about what happened during the Cold War and what it was. It was a fight between the USA and the USSR. I am here not to talk about that stuff though but who started it. I will go over facts supporting that the Soviet Union started the Cold War. The Cold War was started because of the military expansionism of Stalin. America's response was a defensive reaction. As long as the Soviet clung to their dream of imposing rold Communism, the USA had no way of ending the conflict. Stalin’s desire to dominate the world under Communism and his takeover of East Europe was seen to be his first steps towards world communism. This could not be ignored and so President...
Words: 335 - Pages: 2
...During the Second World War, the USSR and the USA, the two great nations in the 1940s united each other to defeat their common enemy, Nazi Germany. Their alliance was however ‘unnatural’ as both countries had conflicting ideologies, capitalism vs. communism and both wanted to spread their power and control in the world. Their incompatible ideologies from the start together with their troubled relationship since 1918 when the west intervened on the Russian civil war on behalf of the White Army, created an uneasy alliance in 1941 that that was most certainly ‘bound to fall apart’ when the common enemy was defeated in 1945. In order to come to a conclusion on the extent to which “An unnatural alliance that was bound to fall apart after the defeat of the common enemy” explains the origin of the cold war the essay will be divided into four parts: the opposed ideologies, events from 1919 to 1945, the Yalta and Potsdam conferences, and events subsequent to the conferences until 1949. The Bolsheviks seized power in 1917 leading to the establishment of the world’s first socialist state whose guiding ideas were those of communism. For the leaders of the western countries these ideas threatened the very basis of their societies, economically and politically, as they followed an ideology of Capitalism. For the USSR, capitalism which revolves around private enterprise was seen as creating divisions between rich and poor and thus the communists believed that all goods should be taken over...
Words: 1809 - Pages: 8
...How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the period 1945-50 was the result of Stalin’s foreign policy? Development of the Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for it’s outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion, use of Red Army and inability to uphold agreements. However for a war of any kind to develop there is always more than one party involved and the USA and it’s president Truman could also be said to have contributed to the developing of Cold War, arguably being equally aggressive as Stalin – taking an Iron fist on dealings with Russia through policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, as well as his direction over the US involvement in the Korean War. However issues such as Britain and Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech, as well as the birth of McCarthyism in America, can also be seen as hindering relations between the two superpowers of the Cold War and therefore playing a role in it’s development. Whether Stalin was to blame for the Cold War can also be judged and evaluated through the use of sources, offering a number of interpretations, from extreme Orthodox and Revisionist views to the more diplomatic reasonings of the post revisionist stance. It is correct to say that development of the Cold War, between...
Words: 3196 - Pages: 13
