Did The Power Of Television Force The U.S. A To Leave Vietnam
Did The Power Of Television Force The United States To Leave Vietnam?
From sources D-L they mostly don't provide any accurate information from what the question is asking. These sources can be quite biased at some stages and shows different general views from one point to another. I shall be analyzing sources from D-L.
Source D is a North Vietnamese poster from the time showing problems faced by the Americans fighting a guerrilla war. As within in the picture it shows American troops who are not sure on what they're doing once in Vietnam. The American troops didn't realise that they're in fact being watched during their time featured in this poster. The Vietcong troops knew their jungle very well, as they used the guerrilla tactics which included the ('booby trap'). The Vietcong, tactic of attrition was to kill as many Americans as possible that they could find. Also the American tactics were to search and destroy ('Operation Rolling Thunder') which didn't work at all. So the Vietnamese citizens hated them more and become more Vietcong altogether. The intended audience for this poster were the Vietcong and the innocent citizens, as they have no uniform like the NVA. This North Vietnamese poster has its advantages and disadvantages.
As this is a poster of propaganda it can't be aired or shown on television. As from the poster not being advertised on television, the American public won't be able to see this poster, which can be seen as a limitation for this source.
This source can be seen as very biased due to it being a North Vietnamese poster which is advertising/showing the American citizens the troops in North Vietnamese as if they don't have an idea on what exactly they are suppose to be doing and that the fact they don't even know they are being watched. Therefore this source is irrelevant.
Source G is a primary aftermath source of the My Lai massacre of 1968 which shows the response in 1968 of an American soldier after having just been notified about the massacre of 347 unarmed civilians. This source is trying not to fault the blame upon to the soldiers, but it's signifying that many soldiers had useful motives. I quote "many of them thought they were going to something courageous on behalf of their country". This was something which they thought was the ('American Ideal'). The soldiers wanted to be a part of the good America who is there to step in at any time when freedom is threatened by communism a.k.a. ('Truman Doctrine'). As this was due to most soldiers had never been away from home before they approved to enter into the service.
From this source it can be seen as being biased. This is because in the article, it states how an American soldier is talking and criticising the conduct in Vietnam from only just one point of view from a soldier. The soldier states in the article that it's something like a Nazi thing. "You Know, it was a Nazi thing. We didn't go there to be Nazis". From this quote, the soldier is saying that when he and former soldiers decided and approved they wanted to become a part in the service, they wanted to do their country ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
From this source it can be seen as being biased. This is because in the article, it states how an American soldier is talking and criticising the conduct in Vietnam from only just one point of view from a soldier. The soldier states in the article that it's something like a Nazi thing. "You Know, it was a Nazi thing. We didn't go there to be Nazis". From this quote, the soldier is saying that when he and former soldiers decided and approved they wanted to become a part in the service, they wanted to do their country proud, not to become a Nazi.
On the other hand, limitations are biased in this article pretty much. There is no real reference but as we know, the My Lai trial was shown on American Television and this plays an enormous part in this very war. Although, sadly, this can be some assistance of help to change the citizen's attitude.
Source K is a primary source of a result of an Australian public opinion poll which was produced in the years of 1969 and 1970. The table of results shows the public judgments as stating if they wanted their forces to continue in the war or be brought back home. This source would have not have any attitudes on American view as it was complete in Australia, hence the fact that the American citizens wouldn't have notified this only upon Australia's selection on what they would obtain.
The results of the Australia's and American's opinions would approximately be equivalent. It's because the Americans pastime are watching Television, so they equally know what was going on during the war in Vietnam. Seeing what was happening, they didn't want their relatives to persist to any further extent. When receiving any news at all, especially, if it was bad news, the more of the American citizens would be in agreement and would want all them back home.
However, there can be some limitations in this source, due to because there is no provenance, which always states who the source should be designed for, when the source got written and how many people of the population were requested to answer.
Source H is a primary cartoon source published in the British magazine ('Punch') in 1967. The presentation of this cartoon shows us how funds and currency which should have been spent on Johnson's "Great Society" being wasted upon the war in Vietnam.
This source can be seen as quite biased, as the cartoon source is aimed at the British public because if the American citizens seen the pictorial, they would start and debate on why this is occurring. Also they would start to question and doubt whether in reality Johnson was being untruthful and dishonest to them because of what was happening with the "Great Society".
It has its limitations, because it's unrelated to American television as it's a pictorial cartoon source that's not being aimed at the American citizens, but is being aimed at the British instead.
Source F is a primary speech of an anti-war American journalist called Richard Hamer written in 1970 according the provenance from an American view of difficulties of fighting guerrillas. This source tells us that the USA soldiers did not know their enemy, as normal peasants were attacking them.
"Did one of them (the peasant's) lob the mortar? If so which one? Should you kill all of them or none of them?"
It's saying that the U.S.A soldiers were using wrong tactics to persuade citizens to side with them, "One does not defoliate (destroy vegetation in) a country and deform its people with chemicals if one is attempting to persuade them of the foe's evil nature".
Also in this article it says "Then a mortar shell lands, right in the middle of the patrol. A couple of guys are dead, others are screaming in agony with a leg or arm blown off, or their guts hanging out" With this quoted from the article, it's stating that you walk down a road between rice paddies. Vietnamese are in every paddy.
Source L is a secondary source and a film which was produced in 1989. It's the life story of a man called 'Ron Kovic'. The source would indeed concern the American citizens' attitude at this stage. On the other hand, this is beside the point now, because it's a secondary past source and wouldn't change or make a difference to the American citizens consideration of American should be departing Vietnam at this stage.
Source E is a photograph of napalm victims, published during the Vietnam War. This is a picture of young children who are victims of napalm that has been sprayed onto their bodies by the USA. From this picture which was shown live footage on television at the time, made the American citizens hate the Vietnam Veterans which then led them to ask for withdrawal of the American Soldiers. This photograph has an advantage because it could have been previously used as a propaganda statement which are showing the USA soldiers standing by and letting little young children be apart of victims of the napalm event.
Although this source can be seen a quite biased because it only shows the U.S.A attack the victims and also there is no sign on any communist atrocities whatsoever.
This very source of the napalm bombing has its limitations because it's just a snapshot of one moment and it was possibly that the US soldiers may have gave the little girl medical help. This was seen by the U.S.A citizens who were disgusted who felt for the young children, especially the little girl who were running naked and didn't want to be apart of the US at all.
Source J shows a primary source photograph of an anti-war protest occurring in the U.S.A. The photograph is from an American school textbook showing anti-war demonstrations at Kent State University in 1970 proposed for American students. The photograph illustrates there was an enormous demonstration at the Kent State University. In addition, the demonstrations are anti-war and plus this protest was ('LIVE') on American Television and the American citizens have witnessed and have ultimately seen what's taking place in the ('My Lai Massacre') and what the American troops have done. Now that the American citizens have witnessed what they have seen, they are horrified.
There is now a physically powerful opposition to the war. This is because America would have observed the trial that taken place for William Calley and would have glimpsed the child who was exposed with napalm. Ultimately, they now see a big protest occurring!
This source can have various limitations because it only presents how the American 'Draft Dodgers' reacted to how the American troops do whilst in Vietnam.
In my conclusion and into comparison, sources E & J gives out a good single clear vision on as to why the troops of America hesitated and change their minds about the war.
This is because Source E, made Americans despises Vietnam Veterans and request in favour of withdrawal of the American soldiers. From the source E, the effects of the American bombing of napalm could have been actually used as a proclamation of (propaganda).
As within Source J, the time when the anti-war photograph protest at Kent State University was modified and produced and published, the American citizens were able to watch the Television and were horrified to discover on what precisely they became a part of. As when the American citizens established this, they didn't want to become a part of this no longer to and further extent. They all approved that it was time for the American soldiers to come back home, wanting this, they setup and started to protest and rebel. So to the question that needed to be answered,
referring and into response as to the question "Did the power of the television force the United States to leave Vietnam?" I would imply; "Yes", as this did play an enormous role as to why the media force led the United States to leave Vietnam entirely.
Lastly, the rest of the sources 'D, F, G, H, K & L' doesn't give much in aspect that are really useful, including articles and pictures unlike source E & F. It also doesn't make a difference on the American citizens' agreements or why the American troops left Vietnam entirely.
