Final Exam Study Guide
Final Exam Study Guide HIST 3370
Popular in The Vietnam War
Popular in History
This 64 page Study Guide was uploaded by Chris Hicks on Sunday December 13, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to HIST 3370 at Bowling Green State University taught by Benjamin Greene in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 48 views. For similar materials see The Vietnam War in History at Bowling Green State University.
Reviews for Final Exam Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 12/13/15
Final Exam Study Guide Week One (24-28 August 2015) John McCain vs. Chuck Hagel -Naval Aviator and POW -Army Veteran of Vietnam -Pro-war (Hawk) -“Dove”, Vietnam was a mistake -Republican Senator -Republican senator, USO, Secretary of Defense for President Obama -U.S. lift restrictions on -Veterans’ causes use of force What needs addressed? Music of Protest Strategy, Tactics, and Operations (Disagreement- not conventional enough vs. too conventional) Media relations (1 televised war, lost vs. won, atrocities vs. good) Why unsuccessful? Different presidential decision making Anti-war movements Aftermath (coming home [U.S. and Vietnam]) o International implications o Credibility of U.S. to defend allies against communism, especially in Europe Origin o Legality Terms -Ho Chi Minh- Nguyen Ai Quoc, founder of Vietnamese Revolutionary Youth League and leader of the Vietminh -August Revolution (1945)- The Vietminh took control of major cities from the Japanese and declared their independence, in hopes that Western Powers and the Chinese would recognize Vietnam as a sovereign nation -Vietminh- League for the Independence of Vietnam, group attempting to win over the Vietnamese people in an effort to gain independence for Vietnam Indochina through WWII Vietnam: A Brief History -Relationship with China and the Age of Imperialism U.S. and Asia: Ideals vs. Economic/Security Interests -Vietnamese view of the U.S. -Vietnamese lessons of American Revolution -America’s Ideas: Wilson’s 14 Points, FDR’s Atlantic Charter WWII in Indochina -French (Vichy)/ Japanese occupations (French cooperating with Japanese) -Formation of Viet Minh and August Revolution “Deer Mission”: The OSS in Vietnam Movie -Deep rooted: Ho Chi Minh fought for decades with the French and U.S. and their South Vietnamese allies -1 televised war and 1 war that was opposed in large numbers Why U.S. in Vietnam? Chinese vs. Vietnam: Chinese and Vietnamese have fought for centuries, Vietnam has history of repelling foreign enemies Cold War: threat to U.S. is spread of Communism throughout the world Vietnamese- more Nationalist or more Communist? North vs. South: North- mining, communal, tight villages South- Farming, individualistic Age of Imperialism (in Asia): British, Russian, Dutch, Japanese, French (In Vietnam for agriculture, rice, rubber, and proximity with China) U.S. with China: -Protect open door policy for China (China is being carved up for European trade) -no exclusive trading spheres -The Open Door Notes (1899-1900) -Idealistic or realistic? -U.S. is an emerging (not great) power in 1898 -using ideals to get trading sphere in China -protector of sovereignty against imperial powers George Washington: Inspiration for Vietnamese Revolutionaries Lessons: ways to fight superior enemy, Chinese history of him states that he fought for the British in the French and Indian War (1754-1763) because he knew he was going to fight them in the future (Social Darwinism: prepare self with experiences (French were suppressing the Vietnamese from experiences where they could lead themselves)) -His characteristics: righteous, self-sacrifice, courage, duty to country WWI -French drew a lot of their troops from their colonies to Europe -Wilson thought WWI was caused by scrambles for colonies, so he wanted to end colonization- -Europeans disagreed Nguyen Ai Quoc (Ho Chi Minh)- appealed to U.S. to live up to their ideals -asked for things Americans possessed before they revolted against the British (Representation, freedom of assembly, etc.) -rejected by U.S., so he turned to the Soviet Union, considered alternate paths to independence -What’s the threat of Vietnamese Communism? -Is Vietnam a Soviet puppet or Nationalist? -traveled Western countries to study WWI- Japan easily takes over SE Asia because Europeans need to fight in Europe WWII- U.S. embargos Japan because they take French Indochina WWII Japanese Occupation of Indochina (1941-1945) -FDR and Churchill agree to arrange events to bring U.S. into war -end to colonies Vietminh-1941, different type of Communism (compared to the USSR) -All-class Nationalism, no land reform/appropriation, had religious base -Learned: guerilla warfare, secure/defend revolutionary bases -See this as a prolonged guerilla struggle -French stayed until March 1945 -“power vacuum”-> August Revolution- Vietminh’s opportunity to consolidate power Deer Mission- OSS agents drop into North Vietnam, organize and train hundreds of soldiers in various ways of fighting enemy, said the Vietnamese recruits were “gung-ho” and that Ho Chi Minh was a Nationalist 1 and Communist 2 nd U.S. Has Ambivalence to Vietnamese Independence -missed opportunity for friendly U.S.-Vietnam relations -want trusteeship to train Vietnam on administering self -Vietnam see America’s ideals, but U.S. doesn’t always live up to them -wants to help rebuild Europe -end colonialism vs. French stability st Week Two (31 Aug- 4 Sept. 2015) 1 Indochina War and Dr. Gary Hess First Indochina War (1946-1954) Terms-DRV- Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the independent Vietnam after Ho Chi Minh’s Declaration of Independence, North Vietnam after the split Bao Dai- “puppet emperor” under French, disliked by people, abdicated by the time Ho Chi Minh declared independence Dien Bien Phu- Final French defeat resulting in their withdrawal from Vietnam -U.S. response to Vietnamese Declaration of Independence -The North- DRV and international Communism -The South- The French and Bao Dai Solution -The changing international context: The Colonial War and the Cold War -Battle Analysis- Dien Bien Phu (13 Mar.-7 May 1954) 1 Indochina War aka The French War What took priority when ideals collided? Assumptions vs. Assessments of the enemy? Vietnamese Declaration of Independence (DOI)- based on American and French Revolutions -2 Sept. 1945, less revolutionary-> similar to U.S.’s DOI (grievances against tyrannical power, restrictions mentioned, etc.) -critique of colonialism -principles in Tehran and San Francisco -Tehran- Tehran Conference to establish post-war goals to end colonialism -San Francisco- UN Charter signed (people’s right to choose own leader) -not like a Marxist Manifesto or like it’s written by Moscow, didn’t sound threatening to U.S. U.S. Confronted by DOI- how to implement anti-colonialization ideals Docment Analysis- What are U.S.’s options regarding approach to French Indochina? rd 1. Trusteeship- go to 3 party (like U.S. or U.K.), like Philippines in American- Filipino War (1900-1902/3), 1946-Philippines independent, 1947- India independent, U.S. “better” to rule than French (had bad ruling practices), Vietnamese thought to be inferior and incapable of self-rule, Vietnamese unlikely to accept 2. Total, Immediate Independence (Self-Rule)- could fall to Communism, but would end colonialism there, Vietnamese already basing ideals off of U.S. which is good (to U.S.), French oppressed them to the point they aren’t thought to be ready for self-rule, racism in U.S. (believed Vietnamese to be racially inferior) 3. Maintain French Colony- Bad ruling practices, but are U.S.’s ally and U.S. wants stable Europe. Post-war Poverty- can give rise to what Hitler did, Russian Revolution, Communist Europe would challenge U.S. trading, to avoid Communism France needed to be prosperous and retain Vietnam When U.S. principles/priorities clash, which prevailed? -Support France vs. End Colonialism -France Prevailed FDR’s Four Policemen- 4 powers take over Asia to lead it out of colonialism End of WWII- North Korea- USSR South Korea- U.S. North Vietnam- Nationalist China (clashed- looting and attack of political opponents by Chinese) South Vietnam- U.K. North vs. South Vietnam- large disparities (equivalent to Detroit vs. New Orleans) North- industrialist/ mining South- agriculture, religiously based War- DRV-North, minimally supported by Chinese at start (Chinese Civil War ’46-’49), minimal from USSR (occupied with Europe and Stalin doesn’t think highly of the Viet Minh), seeking help from nationalist in Asia (Thai, etc.) France-South, gave U.S. idea that Ho’s a “raging communist” who “doesn’t hate the French”, racially inferior and suppressed so long that they must be in the hands of the USSR U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall- end colonies by don’t want them to be Communist Factors Outside Vietnam Influencing U.S. between ’49-‘50 -Korean War (June ’50) -Soviets discovering the atomic bomb (U.S. not only one with bomb now) (’49) -fall of Nationalist China (most populous nation now Communist) (’49) -CCR/USSR/ Eastern Europe recognize DVR -NSC 68 (Apr. ’50) -concludes USSR A-bomb= campaign of Soviet aggression, U.S. needs to counter -$$ to French (10 million-> 100 million), paid for 80% of French war cost -recognize Bao Dai in South Vietnam (known as “The Playboy Emperor”, unpopular and ineffective) Film- portrayed French as incompetent, outdated weapons, low morale, no knowledge of terrain, wear of uniform Reality: largely equipped by U.S. Class Henri Navarre- French Commander in Vietnam Christian de Castries- French Commander at Dien Bien Phu Navarre Plan- Strengthen Vietnamese Army, increase and consolidate French, offensive in Red River Delta to hinder supplies, like Vietnamization (train them to fight as you leave) French Homefront- tiring of war, new prime minister wants peace agreement Operational Situation of Dien Bien Phu- N. Vietnam, W of Hanoi, many roads, interdict Viet Minh’s supplies, draw weaker forces into a fight, use it as a base of operations, use air base. Challenge- far from supply Vietnamese- Vo Nguyen Giap, “Napoleon Complex”, history teacher and law student, journalist, wife hung by French, general of Viet Minh and People’s Army, died at 102 st 1 3 days- human wave attacks by Vietnamese, took 3 outposts, put French under siege (50 miles of trenches and tunnels), ruined air field so supplies had to be dropped in, but AA defenses of Vietnamese were too strong so inaccurate drops were captured by Vietnamese. Surrounded Dien Bien Phu with Artillery -55 days, 55000 French lose to 50000 Vietnamese, who got aura of invincibility Dr. Gary R. Hess- War at BGSU Taught at BGSU 1964-2009 th 1965-real beginning of U.S. war in Vietnam (2015 50 Anniversary) -Johnson- open-ended commitment to Vietnam, low-key (no address from oval office or to Congress) -Mission- advisory-> combat role (bomb N. Vietnam, combat troops) -end of ’66- 200000 troops-> 500000 by ’68-‘69 “Impact that was felt widely and from the beginning was controversial” -small teach-ins at BGSU (May ’65)-> Fall ’65- larger teach-in (“immoral war”) “Beginning of war at BGSU”- number protests on campus, most on lawn between Williams, Mosley, and University Halls Notable Speakers- Sen. Ernest Green- voted against Gulf of Tonkin Resolution -Jane Fonda- anti-war actress -Norman Thomas- a socialist, pacifist ’67- National Day of Protest, Disrupted ROTC Review Student Groups- anti-war- SDS- Students for Democratic Society - Support war- Young Americans for Freedom Hawks- favor/escalate war Doves-anti-war ’68- more Americans think the war’s a mistake, astounded by Tet’s impact (shortcoming of Johnson’s promise that the war would be quick), went down in public opinion March 31- de-escalation of U.S. in Vietnam and not candidate in Presidential run (Enormous enthusiasm at BGSU- testimony to how far he’d fallen) Few day later- MLK’s death and Robert Kennedy’s death in June (Exam week) -students concerned with country’s direction -concerned over whether there should be commencement -William Jerome called together faculty and student leaders -Student body president said commencement should go ahead End of ’68- Nixon elected, plan to end Vietnam, students organized telegram campaign (3500 BGSU students signed) to remind him to end war ’70-nation shaken by KSU student deaths, beginning of end of war, protesting expansion into Cambodia (DVR/Viet Cong used it as a sanctuary), violence in KSU (burning of ROTC th building), Monday May 4 was shooting -BG found out by flyers being passed around campus- “4 KSU students killed” -President Jerome cancelled weekly class, Tuesday was vigil (7000 people) -couldn’t go back to “business as usual”, many places closed for semester -BGSU stayed open but had a program->take SU grades -New University->special classes on events in country -helped keep university open, “distinction of being unique in staying open” -“essential arguments”- debate began in mid-‘60s and continued until wars end and into today - need to understand the “depth of the debate that took place as the war was waged” Opinion of New courses?- “shallow”, exception were those who put time into them, Pres. Jerome was “lame duck President” and this was his last act Correlation between campus then and now?- then- “concern on campus was much more intense”, surprising how much students were paying attention to/ reading about war Support for ROTC then?- more extreme anti-war movements targeted ROTC, disruption of parade in ’67, ’70- movement to abolish ROTC, not allow university credit for it, led into disruption of spring review, roped in area but some protestors broke through and attempted to disrupt it - hostility wasn’t necessarily widespread Protests?- most thing “were advertised well in advance”, a lot of music, Williams difficult place to work, “usually well scripted” LIFE Magazine- leading magazine, BG News-’69-’70- “A Year of Transition”, week of March 14 , President Moore remarked that ’70 was good time to leave, not enter, office Reception staying open- criticism, especially by Miami University What was it like teaching during the war?- 90% of the time didn’t affect the class -faculty more dove-ish than hawk-ish, teach-ins- discussions on war, certain invited because of how outspoken their vies were, business college more hawks, arts & sciences/humanities/social sciences doves -’65 discussion-4 on panel and a couple dozen students there, “expert on panel” because he went to Asia, hard to find information on Vietnam Fear of being drafted?- “no coincidence that many students stayed in college”, also married and married with kids Student- drafted after graduation, anti-war, ended up in Germany Conscientious Objectors?- documented them before they qualified Draft attitude once drafted?- worked to disadvantage of lower-class men (“major system”), draft boards had quotas of draftees/volunteers Attitudes of troops changed at end?- suffer morale during de-escalation, more drugs/alcohol Book Fully balanced analysis on major points of different, all wars become the subject of literature -different from other wars because of (O) orthodox (Standard) vs. ® Revisionists (O)- Spanish-American/WWI/WWII-had to be fought, see wars as good ®- tricked into wars, war was mistake somehow (Shouldn’t of been fought or needed to be fought differently) Different- (O)-critical of war, “fool’s errand”, mistake, unwinnable within any acceptable use of military power, wrong war, wrong time ®-good war, differently if fought differently winnable Tried to select major topics- full statement of both sides’ views 1. Bottom line of war- vital to security of U.S.? (O)-not necessary war ®-necessary 2. How U.S. got involved? ’61 (Kennedy)-‘65(Johnson) a. Not simple O (mistake but disagree on what Kennedy would do- typical Cold Warrior or experienced negotiator?) vs. R- missed opportunities to negotiate instead of war -nothing to bargain with vs. didn’t go for peace -more troops and $= “investment trap” -O and R agree- Johnson did bad job 3-4. how war could of ended more successfully?- certain doctrines of warfare need to be followed, Klauzwitz- coordinate ends with means, concentrate power to enemy, understand objective clearly (Harry Summers agrees) Hearts and mind explanation-won if won over Vietnamese villagers over -lost them before it even started because Communists won them over already 5. Media’s Coverage of Vietnam- “know” there was liberal bias-> more complex than that 6. Tet Offensive- ® U.S. won (O) “devastating loss” 7. Nixon and war’s end- promised peace, gave S. Vietnam chance vs. prolonging inevitable loos for 4 years 8. War’s lesson- doctrines of war from the war Colin Powell-never fight another Vietnam, Wineberger-Powell Doctrine (Certain criteria before war) David Betrayus- counterinsurgency in Vietnam was thesis, proponent of Hearts and Minds and Counterinsurgency st Kennedy’s 1 thing learned in office- “Never believe experts” Opinion of most beneficial thing from war- not to make another commitment of that level Week Three (8-11 Sept. 2015) Eisenhower Eases into Indochina (1955-1960) Terms Ngo Dinh Diem-Leader of South Vietnam in its early years of independence, not liked by his people and thought to be authoritarian Edward Lansdale-Agent sent to Vietnam in order to help the French in their fight against the Viet Minh Geneva Accords-The agreement that split Vietnam into Northern and Southern sections after the French defeat, ordered there to be a unification election two years later (never happened), U.S. did not sign-simply observed Class -When did America’s war in Vietnam begin? -Eisenhower’s inheritance: The U.S., Asia and Cold War -Operation VULTURE: Dien Bien Phu and atomic weapons -Implementing the New Look in Vietnam: SEATO, CIA (Edward Landsale) -Dismissing the Geneva Accords and trumpeting the success of Ngo Dinh Diem -Assessing Eisenhower’s legacy in Vietnam 1949- Fall of China, Soviet atomic bomb 1950- McCarthyism, Red Scare, NSC-68, Korean War (1950-1953) 1952- Ike elected POTUS 1953- Ike inaugurated 1954- Dien Bien Phu, Geneva Accords When did the U.S. war begin?- 80% of French war bills -First U.S. death -First U.S. combat death -Training South Vietnamese soldiers -independent operations in Vietnam American Deaths in Vietnam-LTC Peter Dewey, 26 Sep. 1945 (mistaken by Vietminh as French) -T-SGT Richard B. Fitzgibbon Jr., 8 June 1956 (killed by fellow airmen) -LCPL Richard B. Fitzgibbon III, Sep. 1965 -Captain Harry G. Cramer Jr., 21 Oct. 1957 -MAJ Dale Buis and MSG Chester M. Ovnand 8 June 1959 -Watching “The Tattered Dress” and killed by Vietnamese -Current greatest SE Asian ally- Japan -’45 greatest SE Asia ally- China (Communist rise ended this) -Harry Truman “lost” China (destroyed population), subsequent president vow to not lose another Asian nation to Communism -Soviets were “so backward” that the only way they could figure out the A-Bomb was to infiltrate the Manhattan Project (American thoughts) -NSC-68 (7 Apr. 1950)- A-Bomb in USSR= end of civilization, need to contest Soviet expansion, accelerate use of H-Bomb, CIA and military force, need psychological scare campaign to convince public of total war -End of Korean War= elect Ike- didn’t think U.S. could afford fighting wars around the world -focus on air, sea, and atomic power -“can threaten China with nuclear weapons and they will back down” -Avoiding ground war in Asia -rely on allies-> SEATO->multilaterally, advisors to Indochina, increasing aid Presidents’ Reasons for seeing Vietnam as significant- important because it was a symbol, Ike is 1 to speak of The Domino Theory Dien Bien Phu- warns PRC to stay out of Indochina or else (ambiguous) Operation VULTURE- U.S. plan to supply French, Ike wasn’t going to recklessly use nuclear weapons or begs to use them (released documents) -“You must be crazy” quote by Stephen Ambrose came from mid-‘60s and reflected his views on nuclear weapons at THAT time, he rarely met with Ike -doesn’t want blame for loss or put troops on the ground- set impossible conditions so he French could hold the blame (to get U.S. airpower: had to officially request aid, grant Vietnam independence, U.K. and Australia had to assist, Congress needed to pass the request Geneva Accords- Ike get flexibility since U.S. didn’t sign it Ike’s New Look: Means of Containment in Asia -SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization), regional collective security pact -Korea-end conventional war with atomic threats(?) (Massive Retaliation) -South Vietnam- Military advisors (Landsale) -Formosa Straits- Atomic threats (Massive Retaliation) 1956- U.S. replaces France as nation pledging to defend Vietnam from Comunism Means- Military advisors: Ike commits 600 advisors to help South Vietnam insurgency -Did Ike make it impossible to not go into Vietnam? -No unification elections (ideals) vs. national security interests (Communism spreading) -Diem-authoritarian, corrupt, people not satisfied with him Who Really Started Things in Vietnam for U.S.? -Truman (NSC-68) vs. Ike (escalation/ commitment) Sink or Swim with Ngo Dinh Diem -The Collins Mission and the Elimination of Rivals (The Battle of Saigon), 1954-1955 -Group Discussion and Analysis: Pacification of the Countryside and Strategic Hamlets -The Enemy: Strategy of Indigenous Insurgents and North Vietnamese 1954- Dien Bien Phu, Geneva Accords 1955- Battle of Saigon 1956- Elections to Unify Vietnam IAW Geneva Accords 1959- Group 559 (develop supply trail network) 1960- NLF formed, U.S. election -Ike’s narrowed JFK’s choices 1954- $2 billion spent on French=Manhattan Project -Partial end (Sept. ’46 was start) -Geneva Accords- Vietnamese won but didn’t get full independence (half of country) -French leave North Vietnam (DRV) and consolidate in South Vietnamese (Bao Dai) -100000 troops move to South Vietnam 1955-increase political support for South Vietnam-> appoint President Diem Diem-in New Jersey (missionary school, Catholic) during ‘40s-‘50s, not strong nationalist/patriot reputation, tough for him to gain support Ngo Dinh Nhu- internal security, harsh Madame Nhu- speaks French and English ’54-U.S. not main defender yet-> sends advisors-> J. Lawton Collins- WWII general, Pacific and th th th th st nd European (75 ID at Guadalcanal, 7 Corps in Europe, 4 and 9 ID, 101 and 82 ADs), trusted to assess situation -Mafia vying for control (40000 thugs controlling Saigon) -Countryside-Cao Dai (Mekong Delta) 2 million supporters, 25000 soldiers -Hoa Hao -Montengnard-nomads, not subjects to government control -Buddhist -French and their supporters/refugees -Communists- Elections in ’56 coming up (no need for armed struggle) Le Van “Bay” Vien- Binh Xuyen Crime Syndicate leader and South Vietnam National Police leader Dulles, Diem, and Collins: Saigon, Feb. ’55- John Foster Dulles- Back Diem but Collins says no, strong Cold Warrior -Democrat Mansfield support Diem- Ike let domestic politics take over Clip -Bay Vien and Diem- no deal, Diem attacked Bay Vien, Diem (never compromise) won but Vien crushed -Collins->not confident in Diem -Dulles->”not a puppet government” Class Battle of Saigon- “Pivotal episode”, made Diem look good, opportunity for U.S. to look for others but Collins failed- crossroads->support or cut loose->sink or sink with Diem Purpose of Agrovilles/Strategic Hamlets? Successful? Factors? Consequences for Gov. Stability? -Purpose-taking refugees and consolidating them to areas where they could get aid and together for unity -Consequences- need to have credible policies and leaders Clip -Fortified villages=strategic hamlets, targets for VC attacks, U.S. trying to be optimistic, “willing hand”, “volunteers” Class NLF- combines Diem’s opponents, North slowly increasing agitation Week Four (14-17 Sept. 2015) JFK’s Flexible Response to Vietnam and LBJ & Escalation JFK’s Flexible Response to Vietnam Flexible Response- JFK’s defensive strategy for various types of Soviet attack Counterinsurgency (COIN)- strategy to fight an enemy blending in with the native population NSAM 263- JFK’s commitment to withdrawal NSAM 273- Document escalating U.S. involvement in Vietnam ’60- U.S. Election, NLF formed ’61- Jan: JFK inaugurated, Apr/June: Bay of Pigs/ Vienna, U.S. Advisors- 600->2000 ’62- Oct: Cuban Missile Crisis, U.S. Advisors- 2000->11000 (to a combat support role) ’63- U.S. Advisors- 11000->16000, Jan: Ap Bac, May: Buddhist revolt, July: JFK Berlin Visit, Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, Oct: Administrative Debates on Vietnam, 1-2 Nov: Coup in South Vietnam, 22 Nov: JKF assassination -Waging Cold War in the Third World -Vietnam test case for nation building and fighting COIN (Counterinsurgency) to contain Communism in Third World -Growing instability in South Vietnam: Buddhist Revolt and Coup/Assassination of Diem (’63) -NSAM 263- Kennedy commitment to leaving Vietnam -Kennedy was youngest President and Ike was oldest -Shared idea of needing to contain Soviet/Communist aggression -Differed in how to do so -JFK-focus on 3 World (The “Iron Curtain is Set” already) rd -Ike didn’t do enough to protect the 3 World from Communism -Fall of Cuba to Communism -Too many nuclear weapons doesn’t do anything to an insurgency -too muscle-bound, no credibility in a guerrilla war -Greatest initial concern in Southeast Asia is Laos -Weak start as President: Bay of Pigs, Vienne (USSR verbally beat him down) -Kennedy says the wars in SE Asia aren’t national wars of liberation because there are already established governments in place, USSR says they are wars of liberation -Modernization by JFK-Peace Corps, can accelerate modernization by intervening with aid, make Special Forces and COIN a big deal Hilsman- SF trains South Vietnamese to be guerrillas COIN- harass insurgents, Center of Gravity-> Secure population and separate from insurgents -Doesn’t send in a lot of ground troops but advisors (to make small footprint but still slowly escalate U.S. involvement) -Escalation corresponds with Strategic Hamlet Program ’62-JFK increasing U.S. role-> advisors accompany South Vietnamese into combat (increasing U.S. casualties) and increases air support Oct. ’62 Cuban Missile Crisis-> gave JFK “Strong anti-Communist credentials” ’63- 122 U.S. dead in Vietnam Ap Bac- South Vietnamese perform poorly vs. insurgents -Countryside situation is deteriorating and Diem regime losing credibility -Buddhist revolt escalating- government losing credibility but not trying too much to win over the people -Proof government isn’t living up to U.S. ideals, Diem using troops for internal rivals (not against the Communists) -JFK-> Strong credibility and support for foreign policy-> strong reception in Berlin, Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty -New Ambassador to Vietnam->Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. (Nixon’s running mate in’60)->get on good terms with Republicans and if Vietnam is lost the Republicans will look bad as well 1-2 Nov. 63-Coup in South Vietnam, not surprising because many soldiers were Buddhists and Diem used them to suppress the Buddhists, hopes that new government will come in and be better (opposite happened->multiple coups after this) 3 Weeks Later- JFK assassinated, major “what-ifs” -ground troops- because Johnson had JFK’s advisors also -withdrawal- didn’t use force in other situations -would of kept troops in until at least ’64 for re-election JFK-in-house deliberations when discussing issues LBJ- wants a consensus Why didn’t JFK say corrupt regime didn’t deserve U.S. help? Choosing War: LBJ and Escalation Rolling Thunder- Bombing campaign aimed at North Vietnam George Ball- Main dissenter to escalation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam Tonkin Gulf Resolution- “blank check” given for operations to be conducted in Vietnam Pleiku- Attack on U.S. base further prompting U.S. escalation of involvement -Vietnam: ’63-’64: LBJ’s Inheritance, Tonkin Gulf Resolution and ’64 Elections -’65: Pleiku, street cars, ROLLING THUNDER, and deploying U.S. Combat Troops, why did LBJ “Americanize” the war”? -George Ball- Voice of Caution and Dissent ’63- 11 Oct: NSAM 263, 1-2 Nov: Saigon Coup, 22 Nov: JFK Assassination, 26 Nov: NSAM 273 ’64- May: LBJ/ Russell discussion, Aug: Tonkin Gulf, Nov: LBJ re-elected ’65- Feb: Pleiku->Rolling Thunder-> Ann Arbor, July: White House debates, Nov: Battle of Ia Drang Ike-> JFK- Ike: Advisors for training only JFK: went on patrols, called in air support, etc. -“It’s their war” -Political change would lead to greater political stability -NSAM 263- support coup -NSAM 273- doesn’t really reverse NSAM 263, does escalate U.S. involvement (especially covert operations) -LBJ torn about what to do in Vietnam?- hesitant to go into Vietnam but doesn’t want to lose it LBJ and Russell discussion- it’s not very important but we’re already there -do things that are short of sending in combat troops Tonkin Gulf- SF train South Vietnamese commandos to sabotage North Vietnam, protected by nd U.S. ships, North Vietnamese attack ships, 2 attack by North Vietnamese on ships likely never happened -confused reports about if attacks ever happened LBJ- campaigned as peaceful candidate Pleiku-attacked, escalation needs to happen if we’re going to be attacked -Rolling Thunder, combat troops, etc. Feb. ’65- independently operating troops -“fighting in Saigon to defend Berlin” -Europe opposes U.S. escalation Week 5 (21-25 Sept. 2015) Combat Experience: Vietnam and Strategy: ’65-‘68 Combat Experience: Vietnam Guerilla Warfare Aversion to Killing Reality of War Mai Lai (My Lai, Son Lai) “A lot more to killing than pulling the trigger” Ia Drang- 1 Conventional battle in Vietnam Brain in Combat- Lizard vs. Intellectual Brain -What brain takes over? Lizard in combat (high stress situations) -Lizard Brain- programmed to survive, thinking will cause death Where does Vietnam fit in?- WWI Tactics- modern technology (Machine guns and artillery caused high casualties, airplanes), old tactics needed to change, gas-major psychological attack Trenches/shelling-sitting there watching bodies rot in front of you WWII/Korea Tactics- Airplanes!, mobile lines and know where those lines are -U.S. used supplies to win the war -Changing tactics=changing weapons Vietnam- Operation Rolling Thunder, Helicopter, Small patrols (guerilla warfare, connection to today?), booby traps, no uniforms Tactics- Helicopters, no lines, no uniforms, new technology, ambushes, napalm, night attacks -U.S. starts Vietnam with WWII techniques->Operation Rolling Thunder-Bomb the crap out of them -Helicopters-1000 men, 6-8 in one helicopter, 20 helicopters, 30 minute ride, 100 at a time, engaged alone a long time -Guerilla- best way to beat conventional military, frustrates soldiers answer-small patrols -Booby traps- looking for enemy in dense vegetation not on ground (sticks with feces designed to incapacitate individual for long period of time) -Ambushes-make you look where they want you to -No uniforms- not getting caught means they can blend in Aversion of killing- SLA Marshall (10% WWII veterans claimed to fire weapon/ 90% Vietnam veterans claimed to have fired their weapon, Plausible Deniability-don’t know if they did the killing), Michael Kathman (“Triangle Tunnel Rat”) -Fight or flight -humans only animal to willingly kill own species Michael Kathman- Didn’t kill enemy when given the chance Ranges of Killing- Air/long Distance-bombing, artillery, sniper, Furthest distance- only visible with tool (sniper rifle-like watching TV instead of killing), seeing enemy goes down creates trauma, sniper controls where round goes, 7 Jan to 24 July ’69 Sniper Activity- 1245 confirmed kills (1.39 rounds per kill), (50000 rounds per kill on battlefield) -Medium/short distance-soldier can see and exchange fire with enemy, ambushes at this range (vegetation obscures vision->fired at shadows), they’re people too -Close/Hand-to-hand- undeniable of who’s killed (no plausible deniability), focused on body count How Aversion overcome-Milgram Experiment- obey authority even if it’s immoral Fear of Death- him or me Want to go home Leadership Group absolution- fire as a group (plausible deniability) Hate- Mai Lai Combination of these things leads humans to atrocious things Massacres- better start doing your job, “Just following orders.”, Switches hard to turn off until the job’s done, pent up frustration Dehumanization- make up person closer to animals -play submissive into stupid (associated with less than human) PTSD not big until ‘85 Strategy: ’65-‘68 Division->3 regiments/brigades (1500-2000)->3 battalions/squadrons (600)-> 3 companies/batteries (150)-> 3 platoons (38)-> 3 squads (10) -Escalation in ’65: Shock and awe or gradualism (graduated escalation)? -Air: ROLLING THUNDER -Ground: Search and Destroy -Assessing Westmoreland’s strategy of Attrition- reach crossover point-> method is search and destroy -Validating or challenging U.S. strategic concept? Battle of Ia Drang (Oct.- Nov. ’65) -Clausewitzian Revisionists critique -Gradualism-didn’t do shock and awe (utilizing overwhelming force) -LBJ wants to focus on the Great Society but thinks he can’t legislation if he loses Vietnam -takes time to train/raise large army General William Westmoreland- stereotypical professional soldier from the Citadel-> #1 in class at West Point (’36), Eagle Scout, served in WWII and Kores, Graduate school at Harvard, st commander of 101 Airborne Division, in charge of Vietnam from ’65-’68, -General who lost the war or good general, bad war? -have South Vietnamese protect villages/cities -U.S. out in field against the enemy -fighting war of attrition-kill enemy forces-reach crossover point (kill or capture enough enemy that they can’t continue fighting) -NVA eventually starts feeding into South Vietnam more -goal is to stop U.S. escalation -main effort is to cut South Vietnam in half along “Highway 19” (main transit area) st -1 Cavalry Airmobile-horses->helicopters (Vietnam)->armor -435 helicopters, 10000 troops -M14 (heavy, large round, for long distance engagement)->M16 (lighter, more damage to flesh, jammed frequently) -10 days to train with M16 and not acclimated to new climate Battle of Ia Drang- Oct.-Nov. ‘65 -Plei Mei, 19-25 Oct. -PAVN “Lure and Ambush” -LZ X-Ray 14-17 Nov. -LZ Albany 17-18 Nov. -1/9 Cavalry (Stockton) -Locates field hospital and sets ambushes 1-3 Nov. -NVA- 32 , 33 , 66 Regiments U.S. Army- 1 Cavalry Division -1/7 Cavalry (Moore) (LZ X-Ray) -7 Cavalry of Little Big Horn (no support there), at X- Ray- artillery, every 15 minutes had close air support, 96 B-52s -2/5 Cavalry (Tully), 2/7 Cavalry (McDade) LZ X-Ray-low ground, NVA in tunnels of highlands, platoon gets isolated and surrounded (call in artillery on own position, 7 live, 12 WIA, 8 KIA) U.S. Withdrawal- LZ Columbus and Albany->ambush, lose unit integrity, 60% casualties, 1 company had >93% casualties, friendly fire - get as close as possible to U.S. troops to avoid artillery/close air support -one of worst U.S. defeats in Vietnam External War (Clausewitz) vs. Internal War (NVA learned how to fight U.S.) https://studysoup.com/bowling-green-state-university/hist-3370/study-guide/study-guide-mid- term-exam-hist-3370?id=50592 Week 6 (28 Sept.-2 Oct. 2015) The Other War and the Tet Offensive The Other War: Hearts and Minds -Which enemy would U.S. confront? Which war would U.S. fight? -Ia Drang (Oct.-Nov. ’65): Validating or challenging U.S. strategic concept? -Cedar Falls (Jan. ’67): creating refugees while struggling to find enemy -Ignoring principles of war: critique of Clausewitzian Revisionists -Internal critiques of U.S. strategy (PROVN ’65-’66) -COIN and Pacification: winning “hearts and minds” by securing the population -fundamentals of COIN: not search and destroy but clear, hold (CAPS) and build (CORDS) External Aggression- center of gravity is North Vietnam, Clausewitzian, conventional war Internal Aggression- center of gravity are the people of South Vietnam, hearts and minds, rigid COIN Experience with small-scale COIN- Marines- Haiti and Nicarauga Army-Philippines -brutal wars but U.S. didn’t pay attention Ia Drang- “sets stage” for NVA fighting as a unit NVA- learned to “hug” U.S. troops, don’t take on large units without superiority, need to initiate LZ Albany- disaster following X-Ray (took lessons from X-Ray but ignored Albany) Operation Cedar Falls- Iron Triangle, bounded by rivers and a highway, thick jungle, massive search and destroy operation, relocate villagers because many aren’t loyal to South Vietnam in order to get them services and security to get loyalty from them Video- “talk peace on America’s terms”, use firepower to overwhelm enemy, move population out of VC base areas, main goal- eliminate NLF structure from the area by moving whole population, “seemed to accept it”, Vietnamese knew what was going on -U.S. ended operation and withdrew, VC came right back without much civilian help -Cold War ideology is driving U.S. strategy: think Communists are intimidating South Vietnamese, so they take them to “safety” COIN- Clear (Search and destroy), hold (enemy will creep back if left, CAPs), and build (confidence, infrastructure, etc., CORDS (didn’t get implemented on full scale, didn’t get priority)) Iron Triangle- flattened by U.S. (many LZs), problem were the tunnels, relocate villagers to destroy tunnels On War-became big U.S. at turn of the century, focus on Center of Gravity and follow principles of war-> Summers-attack North Vietnam, more domestic support, China can’t get involved, Search and Destroy wasted resources, not acting decisively, air war consistent, targets off limits, need to at least isolate Vietnam Against Clausewitzians- China wanted North Vietnam, Clausewitzians ignored Clausewitz (fight for politics), Center of Gravity is the population-PROVN-urges pacification, pessimistic about U.S. success (by Creighton Abrams), after ’68 was a better war because of this but search and destroy already discouraged the population, PROVN- need to get individual Vietnamese to support the South Vietnamese government, critical actions at village, district, provincial levels, “this is where the war must be fought” -Westmoreland receives PROVN-only certain number of troops, Vietnam needs to destroy the enemy -ignoring who the enemy was -strengthened VC -USMC CAPs worked-knew what they were doing -inter-service rivalry- Army wants to take war to the enemy so USMC has to do Search and Destroy Video- application of search and destroy- “enemy’s all around you”, “never knew who was the enemy”, vengeance, Vietnamese thought they were being punished -strategy understandable because it denies the enemy sanctuary but need to adopt a strategy based on political needs Nagl- wrote about failure of COIN in Vietnam, rewrote Army’s COIN manual (FM 3-24), CORDS->PRT-Provincial Reconstruction Team (Afghanistan and Iraq) The Tet Offensive -Tet Offensive-The NVA/VC operational plan -Diversionary attacks in the Remote Interior: Khe Sahn -America’s Dien Bien Phu -The Main Effort: Urban Combat in Saigon (Nguyen Ngoc Loan) and Hue -The Outcome -Reaching the “crossover point”…in U.S. public opinion and media (Walter Cronkite) -Reassessing U.S. goals and strategy (Escalate or Withdraw) -The Legacy ’45-’46 (post-war), ’46-’54 (French War), Slow U.S. escalation->’65-’68 (escalation of troops and bombing), Post-Tet->de-escalation, ’69 (Nixon escalates into Laos and Cambodia) U.S. Plan- ’65- build up troops, ’66- blunt NLF gains, ’67-coast to countryside, end->Campaign of Optimism that the war’s almost won (which made Tet seem like more of a shock), ’68-scale down Tet- holiday with significant leave time, unofficial truce -source of considerable debate in North Vietnam-pummeled by bombing, high casualties in South Vietnam, confident that South Vietnam would want “general offensive, general uprising”- key to success -29 Jan.-25 Feb. ’68- initial diversionary attacks on cities in countryside and slowly build up forces around major coastal cities Khe Sanh- besieged at early part of Tet, captures everyone’s attention and is focus of that attention (draws U.S. attention from the cities), lasts 77 days -compared with Dien Bien Phu- besieged and cut off in North part of South Vietnam, Differences- U.S. has air support (B-52s every 3 hours), Dien Bien Phu was a main effort for the enemy but was just a diversion at Khe Sahn -Analogous to the Battle of the Bulge- last ditch effort, U.S. needed massive offensive after both to achieve victory (didn’t do this after Tet) Video-TV “showing different sight”, showed disturbing things, embassy-center of U.S. power in South Vietnam under fire Hue Video-collateral damage to cultural artifacts/buildings Tet- considered U.S. and South Vietnamese tactical victory but strategic defeat- National news was very important -Cronkite-Supported war until Tet, reports Feb. ’68- “mired in stalemate” -goal to reach “crossover point”-difference crossover point- in American public opinion-more think it as a mistake to go to Vietnam -“leads to year of re-evaluation”, Wise Men-support containment -rejects 206,000 troops, pause in bombing, calls for negotiation with North Vietnam, no LBJ re- election -end of LBJ and Westmoreland -start of Nixon and Abrams who liked COIN Week Seven (5-9 Oct. 2015) The Media and the War -Presidential views of the media and the war -Revisionist critique of the media -“How to Lose a War” (1981): blaming biased media for turning the public opinion against the war -New Journalism-advocacy over objectivity -image analysis: iconic Vietnam photos -Network TV news analysis -“Vietnam: It’s a Mad War” (1964)-early but rare critique of the conflict -Bombing, USMC in DMZ, Army in the Delta -Next time: The Air War -Vietnam was the turning point because journalist starting being more subjective -“broader distrust of things that are commonly accepted” Summers-images showed war, not necessarily biased, Vietnam occurred when TV was able to bring images home -WWII-high casualties=higher morale at home, front page- campaign map showing PROGRESS LBJ and Nixon-blamed media for undermining public support for Vietnam -Sensationalized death and destruction, journalists more distrustful of military sources -said U.S. focused on burning villages and killing civilians instead of pacification and journalists concentrated on atrocities, overwhelmingly negative reporting -After Tet: when casualties/atrocities were reported more Argument against the Media- they showed too many casualties and atrocities against Vietnamese civilians Images- ’63 Napalm Strike- “no troops in harm’s way”, can’t see casualties, U.S. technological power Buddhist Monk Burning- ’63, negative (especially with comments afterwards (Madame Nu)) Marines Landing- positive, reminded U.S. of landings and victories in WWII Helicopters on Tree Line- represents U.S. power being able to land troops anywhere Helicopter Crew Casualty- real people experiencing this war Mother and Kids Crossing River- showing the human effect and was caused by U.S, and not VC VC Prisoner- negative because of making him look smaller/insignificant, enemy willing to win or so desperate they use kids?, reality of war KIA being raised to a Helicopter- negative- what’s going on here?, how do you think U.S. troops should be shown? Marines on hill with stricken Marine- looks like we’re losing, chaos, what’s this for? (get up and leave after the battle) Flower in Gun- negative- defenseless against soldiers VC being executed- negative- not in line with U.S. ideals but U.S. is still supporting them Woman over Body bag- who killed these civilians?, could be used to sharpen need for U.S. to be there to protect them from the VC, coverage of My Lai but not of VC atrocities Napalmed Civilians running- Another image of civilians suffering because of U.S. CIA in Saigon Helicopter- final defeat/desperation, U.S. should have done more Videos- It’s a Mad War- after Gulf of Tonkin, before combat troops deployed, men and women wearing rags beating a modern army, South Vietnamese portrayed as incapable, torturers (not living up to U.S. ideals) End- problem is enemy is mixed with friendlies, no goal for war, “we don’t have the solution to the problem”, It’s going to be a Long war, “there will be more of them” (destroyed helicopters), Portrayal of service members- recklessly shooting people, detached, didn’t underestimate challenges to U.S. Week Eight (12-16 Oct. 2015) The Air Wars -Strategic Bombing of North Vietnam -Service Rivalries: Route Packages -Operation Rolling Thunder: Objectives and Results -Operation Linebacker I (Easter Offfensive ’72) -Operation Linebacker II (Christmas Bombing) -Interdiction of supplies and personnel (Ho Chi Minh Trail) -Defoliation: Operation Ranch Hand (Agent Orange) -Close Air Support in South Vietnam: Free Fire Zones and Napalm Revisionists- Never allowed to be used effectively to achieve military objectives OR Orthodox- show unethical use of military power to wage unethical war -U.S. emphasizes technology: mobilizes personnel AND industry (entire society), success of corporations is enlisted as well, technology (not troop number) overwhelms enemy Strategic Bombing- began with Rolling Thunder- 1 sustained bombing of North Vietnam -Rolling Thunder- objectives-hinder North Vietnam’s war making ability - Difference between economies of Japan/Nazi Germany (industrialized with standing armies and they never ran out of equipment but ran out of resources like oil because the front lines collapsed on them) and Vietnam (Pre-industrial with insurgency so they’re not as reliant on motor transport) -Limitations of bombing-enemy adapted to the bombing by moving factories around or repairing damage -suffers from negative objectives-LBJ- didn’t want to focus completely on war (Great Society)/cause national debate on Vietnam and had concerns for PRC/USSR getting involved -Soviet Anti-air defenses more robust as time moved on Nixon- didn’t have much domestic reform, less concerned about USSR/PRC -National security-detante-lessen tensions with PRC/USSR -wants to punish Vietnam-> decent interval (push de-escalation past his time in office) -U.S. will recognize PRC if U.S. can escalate in Vietnam Operation Linebacker I- response to ’72 Easter offensive by North Vietnam -LBJ- 4/5 of enemy was VC (’67- VC- 245000, NVA-55000), Nixon- more NVA vulnerable to attack, >100000 as conventional forces (’72-most U.S. ground troops out, >100000, but escalated air war -Rolling Thunder vs. insurgency, Linebacker was conventional (successful because of lifted political restrictions and nature of war changed from insurgency to conventional war) -bombing of harbors and heavier bombing of cities -Nixon up for re-election in ’72 (“Peace is at hand”) Operation Linebacker II (Christmas Bombings)- crush North Vietnam to convince South Vietnam that North Vietnam will leave and can’t launch another devastating offensive -U.S. suffers heavy casualties -1 3 days- 8 B-52s lost, 15 total lost, ramped-up Anti-air -North Vietnam peace terms didn’t change but South Vietnamese were convinced Influence on North Vietnam and effective campaign? Videos- less resistance in South Vietnam to bombings, pilot brought down by “sharply focused ground fire” -Anti-air goes from “rudimentary” automatic rifles to sophisticated Soviet systems -can air power break morale? Ex. Battle of Britain brought UK together Interdiction-stop troops/supplies from making it to South Vietnam from North Vietnam, and destroy North Vietnam ability to make supplies/get them from PRC/USSR Ho Chi Minh Trail- network of trails between South Vietnam and North Vietnam and went through Laos and Cambodia (neutral nations giving safe-haven to Vietnam) Mu Gia Pass- ~60% of trucks from North to South Vietnam through here, bombed almost daily, repaired after almost each time Video- women often kept up on repairs -failed because: of vastness of trail, repairs constantly occurred, need to deny most of supplies to South Vietnam because they needed only 1% of supplies going to South Vietnam, camouflage and Anti-air defense -misapplication of air power against insurgency who needs minimal supplies Route Packages-Navy and Air Force had various bombing districts (bureaucratic turf war) Defoliation (Operation Ranch Hand)- learned from UK (Malaya), can use chemicals to kill plants but not people -deny access to local food crops, take away cover Agent Orange- famous defoliant (color of barrel), 30 experiment, 6 used, defoliate jungles, health effects were results of industrial process -11 million gallons of Agent Orange used, 19 millions total -destroyed 50% of Vietnam’s timber, genetic mutations in Vietnam and of veterans (compensation set up now for veterans) -war crimes- McNamara-look at laws, everyone hates him, didn’t want to be there later on -deforesting vs. reforming agriculture? Napalm-thickened jelly-like gas, burns longer and hotter, legal? (many protests against it), industrialized warfare against pre-industrial people -immoral use of power in war or missed opportunity on using U.S. power to win? Week 9-14 (23 Oct.-20 Nov. 2015) Anti-War Movements, Music and the War, Who Served?, The Enemy, Nixon and Vietnam, Kent State, Cambodia/Laos, A Better War, International Context, The Paris Agreement, and The Fall of Saigon Context of the 1960s- Did the opposition of the war create the radicalism? Or Did this counterculture use the war to promote their culture? Video- Clergy, student teach-ins (hawks say LBJ isn’t in the war to win), blacks, Catholics (anti- war says war is immoral, pro-war say Communists are atheists), Congressman (mention that war was never declared -American religion used to contrast “Godless Communism” Doves- 1) pacifists-against violence (religious groups- Buddhists, Quakers, Mennonites) 2) radicals- New Left- corporations and political parties eroding participatory democracy, corrupt American system 3) liberals- protesting war but not U.S. society 1) want Geneva Accords to come through, illegal war, violating UN standards, Tonkin Gulf Resolution didn’t give LBJ right to full-scale war 2) morals- immoral, killing civilians, etc. 3) it’s a civil war, outside our ability to influence, not national security interest, validity of Domino Theory, diverting our resources and distracting from our fight against poverty Tactics- legislation, congressional hearings, local movements, prevent military training Students- about 10% of campuses had violent demonstrations (destruction of physical property) and about 10% of students actively involved in antiwar movements Origins- civil rights movement (1964- Civil Rights Act) -Baby Boomers- number of students skyrockets, students outnumbered farmers -Cold War -Government research/grants to colleges -too conformist/corporate/anti-poverty Students for Democratic Society- anti-corporate structure of U.S. Ann Arbor and Berkeley- U of M- 1 teach-in before ground troops land, Alice Herz (82 year old st Quaker) self-immolates, 7 American total, 1 march on D.C. in March 1965, October 1967: 100000 besieged Pentagon, antiwar did more to promote conservatives/right, less effective in fostering liberals -1967 was “Campaign of Optimism” Women- convince men to resist draft (ROTC= Run Off To Canada), use sex->divisive because of objectification of women or more political involvement -felt they needed to be hawks to gain credibility -women active in Civil Rights/antiwar movements didn’t help them, helped give rise to feminist movement Women Strike for Peace (WSP)- before war- ban nuclear testing Black-Americans-MLK and LBJ-politician getting pushed a little -support civil rights but also war disproportionally killing blacks -diverting resources from Great Society (not helping poverty) -“Beyond Vietnam”- 4 April 1967: problems at home needed dealt with -George Ball- remembered unpopularity of stalemate in Korea -Leading figures in U.S. sports against war (Ali, Jim Brown, Kareem Abdul Jabar) 1968- 4 April (MLK dead in Memphis), 5 June (Robert Kennedy dead in Los Angeles) Colombia University- occupied because of discrimination, etc. Democrats-support war or support LBJ Battle of Chicago- “Police Riot”, backlash against protestors as being too violent Nixon-slowly withdraw ground troops but expand air war and into Laos and Cambodia -Invasion of Cambodia->burn KSU ROTC->NG kills students 4 May 1970 Video- heartland remained conservative, increase in veterans opposing the war Kerry-showing flag in backyard of enemy, mission had no point, no territorial gain or securing of strategic objectives, “public demonstration of our presence”, no one listened to vets Did Antiwar movement help end war or prolong it? Music and the War Music of the Vietnam Era- New Left/SDS-topical song-addresses political/social issues -Counterculture- often defined by their music, rock/popular music -intersection with civil rights movement- soul/popular music -pro-war songs -“The Silent Generation”-born between 1925 and 1942-> generation after “Greatest Generation” but before “Baby Boomers” -Children of Crisis- born in aftermath of Great Depression, saw progress (American Dream at work) -progress made them have a very strong faith in government and obedient (because of free will and Red Scare) -Red Scare- paranoid about Communism -The Old Left- “The Almanac Singers”, pro-union (“Roll the Union On”), sympathetic to Communism (helped workers)-> way to organize/strengthen/improve workers’ lives -helped connect U.S. politics and culture/music (Folkniks (‘30s/’40s)- authenticity and anonymity) -“What Did You Learn in School Today”- musical critique of the Silent Generation -Pete Seeger often used music to critique things -use of irony and satire (connected with absurdity (those 2 grow when musicians felt absurdity grew)) to critique the Silent Generation -absurdity coming out of contradictions (Seeger called before HUAC) -New Left- “Folksong Revival” Movements (1960s), self-expression and individualism -Joan Baez -Bob Dylan- “Blowing in the Wind” (1963)- civil rights or Vietnamese being free? -“I Ain’t Marching Anymore” (1965)- Phil Ochs -extremely specific topical songs -burning of draft cards sentiment captured here -it’s the old leading and young falling (parents are sending them to war, generational divide) Counterculture-youth fed up with Silent Generation, alternative point of view via psychedelic drugs -musical styles=>alternative life, (psychedelic) rock, folk, Blues -Jefferson Airplanes, “White Rabbit”->referencing Alice in Wonderland -Defying authority Woodstock Music and Art Fair (15-17 August 1969)- defined generation, rejection of Silent Generation -Country Joe and the Fish- “I-feel-like-I’m-fixin-to-Die-Rag” -Jimi Hendrix- “Star-Spangled Banner”-sounds of war (explosions) and TAPS Mainstream Popular Music- balance between politics and accessibility, Motown- civil rights and war Marvin Gaye- and “War” Edwin Starr, KSU- 4 May 1970- “Ohio”-Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young- mainstream, necks out Pro(?)-War- duty/patriotism, Anti-protestor/counterculture/draft-dodgers -“The Ballad of the Green Berets” and Pat Boone getting pissed in “Wish You Were Here, Buddy” Music and Vietnam- patriotic songs, assessing influence of music on public opinion Composition of Armed Forces- -Draft-Rich Man’s War, Poor Man’s Fight? -Draft Evasion- college, medical condition, and political connection (Guard/Reserves) -Conscript force in crisis (drug abuse, racism, combat refusal, fragging, atrocities) Music- pro-war/patriotic were largely country/Western, 80->600 Country stations in 1960s, music sales tripled, 70% of most influential rock n’ roll albums released during Vietnam Some Argued Music was Influential: doves: message helped in ending war, hawks: driving young to Satan/Communism -other said it was more about sound and not message -“Eve of Destruction” banned on many stations -most popular song was “The Ballad of the Green Berets”- honor, pride, esprit de corps, etc. -Merle Haggard-“Okie from Muskogee”- critique of counterculture- don’t need drugs, student protests are disrespectful Who Served? Composition of Armed Forces- evasion (finding deferment/waiver so one doesn’t have to serve) vs. resistance -40% of draft age males in military during Vietnam (10% IN Vietnam, 2% COMBAT IN Vietnam) and 57% got deferments/exemptions, 2% resisted -WWII- avg. age: 26, 12 million served -Vietnam- avg. age: 19-20, 8.7 million in armed forces -Those who served: 55% working class, 20% poor, 25% middle class Draft Reforms-1970- lottery based on birthday, local draft boards determined what jobs were important, etc., had quota In Crisis- largely conscript-more drugs, racism, fragging (typically a threat to NCOs/officers that get enlisted killed because of incompetence or zeal) -Combat refusal- not going out in order to survive -Drugs- available, probably in armed forces in Europe and U.S. too, 80% who started in Vietnam quit once home -minorities and working class disproportionally served, 1966- 6% had college (1970- 10%) -higher college service started when forces drew down -drugs and racial divisions- ‘50s and ‘60s- better chance for a military career for black Americans Video 1- credit belongs to both whites and blacks, not much differences between the races, “We don’t feel that way in the service”, 1967- surprised military wasn’t reflective of society’s racial divide, common enemy in combat Video 2- 1971- away from playing they’re racially segregated, don’t