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

Is there sufficient evidence in sources A to F to explain why there was an anti-war movement in the United States during the late 1960s and 1970s?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Is there sufficient evidence in sources A to F to explain why there was an anti-war movement in the United States during the late 1960s and 1970s? In this essay I am going to explain why there was an anti-war movement in the United States during the late 1960s and 1970s. In order to do this I will be looking at a number of sources and I will also be using my own knowledge to see if there is enough evidence to explain why there was a peace movement. To begin with is source B. This is a primary source. It is a photograph of napalm victims published during the Vietnam War. I am aware that some photos can be misleading, but in my view, I think that this source is honest because it captures the moment and it has not been staged. This is because it shows innocent children being horrifically burnt and US troops behind them not caring for them and photographing the scene. This source indirectly explains why there was a peace movement. This source has contributed to the media and it shows that media coverage was a major factor that led to an anti-war movement in the USA. Because the Vietnam War was the first ever war to be captured by the media, as soon as people saw photographs and footage from the war, they were horrified. ...read more.

Middle

On the other hand, as this was published in a British magazine, this may not have directly affected the US. It may not have even been seen by the US. This source alone is not fully sufficient to explain why there was an anti-war movement because I believe that this source being viewed itself would not influence the public to protest against the war and set up a peace movement. Next is source E which is a primary source. This source is a statement made by the BBC commentator, Robin Day in 1970 about the Vietnam War. In my view it is a very powerful source and it provides sound evidence to explain why there was an anti-war movement. From my own knowledge I know that this war the first war to be captured by the media, so everyone had the opportunity to see all the suffering, sickness and death happening on colour screens right in front of them. To add to the overall anxiety felt by the public towards the war it also suggests that due to the "uninhibited television coverage" a democratic country will never be able fight a war "however just". Therefore, in my view, this source is extremely sufficient to explain why there was an anti-war movement during the 1960s and 1970s. ...read more.

Conclusion

Therefore, it is biased. Finally, I feel that this source could not have had an effect on the peace movement. The reason for this is because it was published twenty years after the war in 1992 therefore, it would have not been seen by the public at the time of the war. This is insufficient evidence to show why there was a peace movement in the US. In conclusion, I believe that the majority of the sources do not provide sufficient evidence in explaining why there was a peace movement during the 1960s and 1970s. One reason for this is because some of the sources are biased; only showing one side of the story. However, in my view the most important reason why the sources were not sufficient is because there was no information showing details of where and when it was published. So one can argue, did these sources actually impact upon the US public? Nevertheless, there is one powerful source, which being viewed itself, could have led to an anti-war movement. This source links to the media coverage of the war. I think that the media coverage was a huge factor as to why people were opposed to the war. From my own knowledge I know that the introduction of the colour screen televisions played a huge role in influencing people's attitudes. ?? ?? ?? ?? Shegina Begum ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Vietnam 1954-1975 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 GCSE Vietnam 1954-1975 essays

  1. Vietnam Coursework Comparing sources

    high in the sky without warning" if one desires to secure popular support among a people. As such, it is clear that Source F attributes American defeat to the crimes they committed against the Vietnamese population as a whole in an effort to defeat the Vietcong.

  2. This statement suggests that television was an important reason why the United States lost ...

    This would not have led to viewings on television because the cameras would not have been able to get into the forests and watch the fighting. However it did lead to a change in tactics to the Americans using napalm and the defoliant, Agent Orange.

  1. Free essay

    Study Source A. Do you agree with this interpretation of the problems faced ...

    The incident at My Lai happened on the 16th March 1968 which is about halfway through the Vietnam War. In the extract Bilton has made several points that could be faced by all US soldiers, but these are general statements, aren't supported by the statistics to show how true these claims are.

  2. Why did the USA become involvedin Vietnam in the 1950s and 1960s?

    It also says "The independence of Vietnam is crucial to the Free World. Vietnam's economy is essential to the economy of all South-East Asia." This shows what America thought of Vietnam. They thought it was the most important country in the whole of the Free World.

  1. Did the power of television force the US to leave Vietnam?

    The Tet Offensive was a disaster for the Americans. The My Lai Massacre did nothing to help the situation. When people found out about the My Lai Massacre they were shocked at the horrific behaviour of the American soldiers. President Lyndon Johnson decided to withdraw from the presidential election in 1968.

  2. John Keegan, a modern military historian suggests that Haig was an efficient and highly ...

    are dieing it is partly his fault by using a tactic that encourages manslaughter the tactic was attrition (keep bombing the enemies trenches). Also, source A is a complete contrast from source b because source A doesn't mention any bad points but source B does.

  1. I think that the four most significant themes in the Vietnam War were protest ...

    The weapons used by both the Vietnamese and the US also had short term significance as well as long term; this was evident by the amount of people who died in the war ? this affected thousands of families all over Vietnam as when the war was over there was

  2. How coverage of Vietnam in the USA led to demands for peace

    feel as if they had been lied to by the government about the horrors of the Vietnam War. The Mai Lai Massacre took place on March 16th 1968 under the command of Lieutenant William L. Calley in the morning where soldiers of Charlie Company, a unit of the American Division's

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