• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent can the growing involvement of the United States in Vietnam, in the years 1950-1968, be seen as an ideological crusade against communism?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent can the growing involvement of the United States in Vietnam, in the years 1950-1968, be seen as an ideological crusade against communism? The growing involvement of the US in Vietnam in the years 1950-1968 can be seen as an ideological crusade against communism for various reasons. The main reason being the quagmire theory which increased involvement for presidents and got them further into the 'mud'. Stalemate was also an important factor as it rejected any thought of withdrawal as the US did not want to lose respect/face. The commitment trap made the US become increasingly involved. However, it can be seen that the Cold war caused the US to 'crusade' against communism. US intervention in Vietnam was stimulated by their hatred of communism which was a belief that went against freedom, free trade and democracy, everything the US said they stood for. The US refused and hated communism for many years as it was a threat to security, enterprise and liberty. The particularly disliked the idea of communism spreading even before it's rising. Furthermore, McCarthy's 'red scare' enforced US's very strict capitalist views and its fear of communism spreading and forced a crusade against it. Therefore, in order to ease the threat of communism to the superpower status of the US, the presidents had to seem strong. ...read more.


The US feared the takeover of Vietnam by the USSR because if this was to happen, the USSR would recruit all resources to benefit them and go against America in the Cold war. The US could not let their trading economical interests be jeopardised as the USSR would become increasingly powerful. Each president took one step after another, thinking each step would solve the Vietnam problem. However, the US then got deeper in and therefore it became impossible to leave. Truman was committed to help the French, but as the French could not fight guerrilla tactics, this help kept on increasing as time went on. Therefore, Truman took a step in the 'mud'. Eisenhower continued the commitment without looking into it by setting up SEATO (Southeast Asia treaty organisation). This was to protect South Vietnam; however this created a reliance on American aid, rather than allowing the South Vietnamese to effectively fight the north alone. Kennedy further committed by increasing the number of advisors sent to Vietnam from 3,000 to 12,000, hoping to improve the morale of the ARVN and fortunes, but made them rely further on US help. They sent in helicopters but AP BAC only showed that this led to the ARVN being less active. After Kennedy died, Johnson promised to keep up US commitment as he was not elected as president. ...read more.


It was difficult to turn back once Truman had committed the US to aid Vietnam through France as it would damage they credibility. By refusing the Geneva Accords and setting up MAAG and SEATO, Eisenhower further committed US to Vietnam. As he sent in more military advisers, once they are in South Vietnam, it is difficult to come out. The ARVN were lacking motivation and were bad fighters who needed to be supported or they wouldn't be able to defend US advisers. More and more Americans became actively involved as Kennedy sent in Green Berets and helicopters. Furthermore, as Johnson sends in troops to protect the advisers, this further makes the US become increasingly committed. Overall, there were various steps that made the US involved and committed in Vietnam but they were trapped in the end anyway. To conclude, the growing involvement of the US in Vietnam was highly due to the ideological crusade against communism. The US were committed to Vietnam even though they knew they were not going to win, but wanted to avoid being seen to lose by American voters. Also, due to their ignorance of the situation, each successive president made decisions that furthered their commitment. The cold war shows that the US was adopting a battle against the spread of communism, rather than a battle of ideologies. Overall, it seems that US involvement was fuelled by their hatred of communism. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Other Historical Periods section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Other Historical Periods essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent was warfare between Britain and France the main contributory factor in ...

    3 star(s)

    the terrible winter France had endured made life for the peasant even worse. H Morse Stephens makes the point "Starving people could hardly be expected to see how the surrender of one fourth of their incomes could help them". Another reason why the agricultural system of France was so much

  2. To what extent was the Third Crusade a defeat for the Latins?

    It is commonly agreed by the leading crusader figures, that Richard's capture of Cyprus in May 1191 was a key victory for the crusaders. Prior to the crusade the island of Cyprus had claimed its independence from the Byzantine Empire under its leader Isaac Ducus Comenus.

  1. Why did the United States fail to win the Vietnam War?

    Therefore the consensus in favour of US policy had broken down but it was not replaced by a new agreement against the war but by division. In addition, events such as the protests over the invasion of Cambodia in 1970 added to the pressure on the congress to limit the

  2. How effectively did the design and decoration of the Parthenon suit its function?

    There was to be a different to the festival every four years as it would extent over 4 days with many public events. Much of the attraction for the festivals was the feast that follows it. As there was so many sacrifices devoted to Athena there was enough meat to

  1. To what extent was the military prowess of the Crusaders the main reason for ...

    However where this argument falls down is that fact that no-one appointed a leader, despite several candidates.

  2. How effectively did colonial governments respond to the rise of nationalism in Southeast Asia ...

    Having nipped the rebellion in the bud, the Dutch struck at the PKI, by banning it and having its members either exiled or interned in New Guinea. Thus, ended the initial attempts of the militant, left-wing nationalists to oust the Dutch by the use of force whilst the leadership of the nationalist movement reverted to more moderate parties.

  1. To what extent could the Crusades be described as failure within the years 1095-1195?

    Simultaneously in XI century the number of pilgrimages to the Holy Land had increased. " Infidel Turk "was portrayed as a barbarian, whose presence in the Holy Land is intolerable to God and man. In addition, the Seljuks created immediate threat to the Christian Byzantine Empire.

  2. Why did the West Saxons find it so difficult to deal with the Viking ...

    they found their way to the vill and arrived at the gates, the Viking?s shot out and overwhelmed the West Saxons; causing them to flee.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work