Source D is a cartoon published in 1967 by the British cartoon ‘Punch’. The cartoon shows the American Economy as a train. At the back of the train, is L.B.Johnson, and is shown breaking up ‘The Great Society’ and using it to fuel the conflict in Vietnam. The cartoon, in my opinion, is not reliable evidence. My reason for thinking this is due to the fact that the cartoon is from a British magazine and thus would not show the overall opinion of the American citizens.
Source E is a statement made by the BBC commentator Robin Day to a seminar of the Royal United Service Institution in 1970. The Source describes the view of Robin Day towards the conflict in Vietnam being broadcast on colour television. He talks about how the fact that the war is freely broadcast across television sets throughout American. This would provide the ambition for more people to join the Anti-War movement. This is a good piece of evidence to show how the media in American had a massive impact on people’s views to join the Anti-War movement.
Source F is a video extract of the documentary ‘Four Hours In My Lai’. The extract is useful in explaining why there was an Anti-War movement in America as it shows a number of key aspects. Firstly the extract shows how the people involved in the My Lai massacre were actually treated during their ordeal. Secondly, the true feelings of the people involved are deeply expressed. The extract also shows the feelings the US soldiers involved. In an interview, one soldier spoke of his involvement in the My Lai massacre. The soldier, following his ordeal was on heavy medication due to depression. He spoke of how the soldiers knew that they were going to kill the people even before they arrived. He also describes of how he didn’t want to kill anyone but once he had begun to kill he couldn’t stop. I know this to be true, as I know that many of the soldiers were inexperienced and just followed orders, with no sense of their own feelings. The Source also shows the distress of people several years on after the incident. There are however several aspects which the Source does not show. Firstly, there is no evidence of how the people in America felt towards the My Lai massacre. Secondly, there is no footage of the trail of Lieutenant Calley, surrounding the involvement of his part in the My Lai massacre.
To a certain extent, the Sources are useful in explaining why an Anti-War movement broke out. However, several other pieces of evidence are required to show why an Anti-War movement began.
The first piece of evidence I have to show why an Anti-War movement broke out in the US is the fact that the US government was forced to ‘draft’ many young men to join the armed forces. The opposition to the ‘draft’ was extremely high. Many people avoided the call-up and were labelled ‘draft-dodgers’. Many burned their draft papers and some even fled to Canada or Europe. There was a widespread resentment to the fact that many educated, middle class Americans could find legitimate ways of avoiding or postponing their call-up. This left the fighting down to poorer Americans, many of whom were black.
The second piece of evidence I have is the impact that funerals had on the US citizens. Many US soldiers, mainly teenagers were killed in action. The total of deaths reached its peak in 1968 when 562 American soldiers died in a single week. It made no difference to the grieving families that 5,550 Vietcong died as well. The fact that many young soldiers were constantly dying fuelled US anger, resulting in an increased number of people joining the Anti-War movement.
The third piece of evidence I have is the Big City Demonstrations that took place in major cities in America. Many people disapproved with the war and were willing to express their views, amongst others, by staging huge rallies in major American Cities. The demonstrations acquired a huge following and thus would increase the amount of people joining the Anti-War movement.
The forth piece of evidence I have is the protests of war veterans. These protests were often the most moving and most significant as the protestors had actually fought in the war themselves. Over 300,000 veterans took part in the ‘Veterans March’, one of the biggest protests to be held. Many were on crutches and in wheelchairs, and wearing old uniforms. These so-called heroes of war shocked the viewing public when they discarded their war medals and ribbons. Upon seeing the distress and suffering the veterans had gone through, many people would not wish for any other person to experience the same pain and trauma and most likely join the Anti-War movement.
The fifth piece of evidence I have is the protests of hippies. The protests were more popular amongst young people. During the late sixties and early seventies, a craze for mini skirts, punk rock, civil marches, race riots and drug abuse came about. The so-called hippies disapproved of the conflict in Vietnam. The hippie’s told people that the only meaningful response to the conflict was to make love not war. In seeing the hippies joining the piece Anti-War movement, other teenagers, wishing to be a part of the trend, would join also.
The sixth piece of evidence I have is the role of the media on people’s views and opinions. The media played a massive role in ever increasing numbers that joined the Anti-War movement. Graphic pictures were displayed in magazines and on television. Night after night coverage made viewers begin to take the affects of the war into consideration. The graphic picture of a Buddhist monk igniting himself, broadcast minutes after actually happening is a good example of this. This picture also convinced President Kennedy that Diem needed replacing. Two further images that were freely broadcast straight into the home of US citizens were the street assassination of a suspected Vietcong member and the graphic image of children fleeing the site of an American Napalm attack. The fact that these images were uncensored and freely show would provide the justification many people required for themselves to become a part of the Anti-War movement.
The seventh piece of evidence I have is the Kent State University Protests. Many students wished to be a part of the Anti-war movement and thus staged their own protests. The most famous of these student protests was the one of which took place at Kent State University. On Saturday 2nd May 1970, over 800 students protested on campus, burning down one of the university buildings. The next day, the protest took a sinister turn. Several hundred students had assembled themselves upon the grassy common situated on campus. Armed policed paraded themselves onto campus. The police began to fire tear gas at the students. This had little effect on the students. They continued to gather. Greatly outnumbered, the police began to retreat up hill situated behind their position. The police seem frightened. The demonstrators began to draw closer, upon which they met a barrage of rifle fire. Within seconds the peaceful protest had suddenly become a scene disaster with four students dead. This would greatly increase the numbers of people joining the Anti-War movement, as they had seen the terror that innocent students had gone through for simply expressing their opinion.
The final piece of evidence I have is the US reaction to the My Lai massacre. On March 16th 1968, US troops stormed the coast near the small town of My Lai. The village hosed around 700 hundred inhabitants. The US bombarded the village in a Search and Destroy mission, in an attempt to find Vietcong troops. The first wave of US soldiers, led by Lieutenant Calley, spent two hours in the village killing anything they came across, innocent or not. Children, mothers and animals all suffered the wraith of the US troops. Despite being covered up for 18 months later, the American public was outraged by the actions taken by the US troops in My Lai. Many Americans found what they saw so shocking they refused to believe it was true. Many of the soldiers responsible were never brought to justice with exception of Lieutenant Calley, he was sentenced to life imprisonment and hard labour, however, he was released from prison little more then three years later. I feel that My Lai massacre would have had the greatest affect on people’s opinion to join the Anti-War movement. The images witnessed were so shocking American people were ashamed to be connected with a country that could alloy such an incident. Their anger would lead them to join the Anti-War movement. The fact that the incident was given huge amounts of airtime would also help to fuel the Anti-War movement.
In conclusion I feel that Sources A-F provide an insufficient amount of evidence, and that further evidence is required to explain why an Anti-War movement broke out in America. I feel that I have fully explain the further evidence I have collected and use them to explain why an Anti-War movement broke out in America
