- Study Sources C, D and E. Use the evidence of Sources C, D and E, and your own knowledge, to explain why the US forces were unable to defeat the Viet Cong.
There were many reasons as to why America was unable to defeat the Vietcong. One of the reasons why the Vietcong were undefeated were their use of guerrilla tactics and America’s poor preparation for war. America had very little experience of troops like the Vietcong and Guerrilla tactics. The Viet Cong had the support of the people, where as American forces were unpopular in Vietnam. A further reason why the Vietcong were undefeated was that they were more familiar with the infrastructure of Vietnam and had a number of different supply routes, which they used. When the US forces bombed one of their routes, such as the Ho Chi Min trail, the Viet Cong were able to use other routes to transport their supplies.
Caputo, who volunteered to fight in Vietnam, wrote Source C in 1977. Caputo says that “war is attractive to young men who know nothing about it”, this hints that the American forces did not really know what they were letting themselves in for and that they unprepared. Source C also states that “our mission was not to win terrain, but simply to kill”, this demonstrates the deterioration of tactics and suggests that US troops lacked tactics and motivation. The fact that their mission was to kill would have had a bad effect on the soldiers and they may have lost sight of their actual goal, which was to rid South Vietnam of communism. In Source C, Caputo mentions that the Viet Cong avoided head on fighting stating that it was a, “rare occasion the VC chose to fight a set-piece battle”. Caputo also says that these battles achieved nothing except adding to the number of dead. Source C is from the point of view of an American soldier, it gives us the overall impression that the US troops were unprepared, unmotivated and had no real thought for what they were supposed to be achieving.
Source D is an extract from the writings of Ho Chi Min, who was the leader of the Viet Cong. Ho Chi Min states that, “when fighting in an enemy occupied area, we must use guerrilla tactics”, this included sabotage, terrorism, and controlled, small-scale battles. This shows us that the Viet Cong were organised and planned how they would achieve their goals. This source helps us to understand why the Us forces were unable to defeat the Viet Cong; because the Viet Cong tried not to involve themselves in large scale battles unless they were, as Ho Chi Min says, “one hundred percent sure of success”. Ho Chi Min also says that the aims of guerrilla warfare, was to “nibble away at the enemy”, meaning that the Viet Cong should not allow the enemy to eat or sleep in peace and the enemy should be under constant attack. This shows that the Viet Cong were motivated and that they had clear set out targets, this helped them remain undefeated by the US. Part of the reason why the Viet Cong were so well motivated was because they truly believed in what they were fighting for; communism.
Source E is about how the National Liberation Front (previously called the Viet Cong), were expected to treat the people of Vietnam. It says that the NFL should be; “fair and honest with the people”, the aim of this was for the NFL to “be respected and loved by the people”. This shows that the NFL cared about and tried to have the support of the people, and this could be a factor as to why they were undefeated. America on the other hand, did not have the support of the people and were even hated by some people. This is not surprising, as America killed many Vietnamese civilians, and dropped a large amount of bombs.
- Study Sources F, G and I. How useful are these sources as evidence of the public reaction in the USA to the Vietnam War in the mid-1960s?
Source F, is an extract from an article in Newsweek magazine that was published in 1967.The article states, “64% said that television had made them feel like backing up the boys in Vietnam”, it also says that 26% felt opposed to the war because of television. This shows us that, according to this article, television is encouraging people to support the war. However, we do not know how reliable the survey is as there are no details about the type of people that were questioned or the number of people questioned. Information about the type of people questioned is important because different types of people would be biased about their view of the war. The number of people who were questioned is important, because even though there was a 64% majority, saying television influenced them to support the war, we do not know how many people it actually was. By giving the results as percentages, the figures are being manipulated; it could be 64% of one hundred or 64% of ten thousand. The information in the article is too vague and so it is not very useful as an indication of public opinion.
Source G, is a table showing the public view of the most important problems facing the USA. From the years 1965 to 1968, it shows the main problem the people thought was facing the USA was Vietnam. The information in Source G is from a ‘Gallup Pole’, which is an respected, independent survey and a range of different groups of people are questioned. We do not know how many people were questioned for the pole, but because the information is from a ‘Gallup Pole’, we know that this source is reliable. However, this source is not that useful, as it is not very detailed about what the people think. The source tells us that from 1965 to 1968 American people recognised Vietnam as an issue, but it does not tell us what particular aspect of Vietnam people thought was important.
Source I is an article that describes what happened at My Lai, although My Lai occurred in 1968, this article was published in 1970. Because this article was not available to the public until 1970, this source is not terribly appropriate to this question. However, because the government concealed the events of My Lai, it does indicate that the government was weary of public opinion and reaction to Vietnam. It also shows that they wanted support of the people and that they knew that people were capable of reacting in a negative way. This highlights the fact that the public was not as informed, as they should have been, and so makes public opinion less valuable as evidence.
- Study Sources G, H, I, J, K and L. Use the evidence of these sources, and your own knowledge, to explain why public opinion about the war in the USA changed between 1967 and 1970.
Between 1967 and 1970 public opinion about the war changed because more information was released and was readily available to the public, who began to notice what was really going on in Vietnam. Source G shows that the public were recognising Vietnam as an important issue, but because the information in the source is not at all detailed, it does not explain why opinion had changed. However, one of the reasons why opinion changed was because people began to realise that the war was not being won. Occasions such as the Tet Offensive made people realise that the US troops were not very successful and were actually being attacked by the communists they were supposed to be eliminating. In 1968, the Viet Cong attacked and took over twelve US bases and the US embassy was attacked. This had a devastating effect on public support, because the whole attack had been broadcast on American television. Vietnam was the first televised war, and so the American public could see exactly what was happening. Many people had never seen moving images of war and so people were more shocked by what they saw, sometimes what was shown on television was uncensored and this magnified the effect it had on the public.
Source H is from a letter written home by an America soldier. In the letter, the situation in Vietnam is described as bleak and tragic. The soldier emphasises that he is “sick to death of it”, referring to the situation in Vietnam. This is one of many letters like this, which would have been sent to the families of soldiers. The people at home would have a first hand account of how bad things were in Vietnam and how bad things were for their loved ones. These kinds of letters influenced individual opinion greatly and people began to stop supporting the war, but only small scale.
Source I is a description of what happened at the My Lai massacre, information about My Lai was not realised until 1969, but when it was it caused out rage. Firstly, people were angry because of the appalling way in which US soldiers had treated the people they were supposed to be helping, and secondly, people were angry that this information had been concealed from them. This really lowered public support of the war and they were horrified by images such as Source J. Source J is a photograph taken at My Lai, it shows some Vietnamese children, hiding behind their mother. Images such as these magnified the inhumanity of what was happening in Vietnam. Most people found it impossible to support or condone the USA’s actions in Vietnam.
Source K is an anti-war song, which was written in 1967, it is sarcastic and gives the soldier’s view of Vietnam. This song summarises what many American’s were thinking about Vietnam. The most prominent part of the song is:
“What are we fighting for?
Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn”
This shows one of the main questions being asked by the American public, ‘what were they fighting for’; to most Americans the war in Vietnam appeared to be a suicide mission. Source K helped to change people’s opinion about the war, and was successful as it reached a wider audience than soldiers’ letters home did.
Source L demonstrates that the USA was becoming arrogant and that the USA was trying to force its ideas and products on other countries, in particular Vietnam. Source L effectively demonstrates the growing concern that the USA was becoming too arrogant in its application of capitalism. It is a cartoon and it features the American flag, being given to a Vietnamese man, and it does not fit him. This illustrates the view that American help was not really wanted, or needed in Vietnam and that capitalism does not work in Vietnam. The image of the American Flag is ironic because, it symbolises liberty and justice, things that were clearly not being shown to the Vietnamese people. People began to think that it was not right to impose the American political system on to another, completely different, culture.
Another reason why public opinion changed was the death toll of US soldiers. Many people could not understand how so many soldiers could be killed by a so-called 'backward society’ that had hardly any of the weapons or technology that the USA had. People wondered why the USA was losing a war against such a small country, especially when they had never lost a war previously. Another reason related to this, was the huge amount of money going into the war effort. Some plans for the USA had to be scrapped so that funds could be redirected to the Vietnam war, and this left many people feeling rather bitter towards the government, and questioning the government's reasoning for the war. Other reasons were the demonstrations that were held, protesting against the war, and the government. Not only did these demonstrations raise public awareness but some of them caused even more mistrust of the government, for example, in one of the demonstrations, the US National Guard killed six students at Kent State University and Jackson State College. Lastly, the Tet offensive in 1968 confirmed, for many people, that the US were being defeated, as the Vietcong had been able to reach so far as Saigon.
- Study all the sources.
The writer of the Source M believed that television played an important part in changing people’s attitudes to the Vietnam War.
Use the sources, and your own knowledge, to explain whether you agree with this view.
I agree with this view expressed in Source M because, television had an immediate impact. As soon as something happened in Vietnam, it was relayed back to the USA and put straight on to the television. Previously, this was not possible and news from the front line took weeks to filter back to civilians at home. In addition, television had very little censorship, partly due to its nature and because TV networks didn't have enough time to censor footage properly because they had to broadcast as soon as possible.
The Vietnam War was the first war in which civilians at home could see the harsh realities of war. Everyone knew exactly what was going on in Vietnam and they saw things that changed their opinion as to whether the US should be involved. The Vietnam War also saw a new aspect of reporting for the first time, reporters were just interested in the facts. This mainly because that is what the public wanted and because the facts were so horrific, that they did not need to be enhanced. The more facts a reporter could give, the more popular the story would be. This resulted in a much greater informed public.
Television made the events in Vietnam seem nearer and more relevant. Previous wars had been removed from the general population and they did not feel a part of it, nor did it affect them in any way. However, now the war was being broadcast straight into their homes, they could do little to keep away from it.
Footage from the front line was broadcast repeatedly and this had the effect of drilling events into the public. The war became a part of their lives and they knew exactly what was going on. This must have had an effect on their opinions as to whether what they were seeing should be happening.
There are of course other reasons for the changing attitudes but in I think that they were played a less significant role. Magazines and newspapers, had been around during previous wars, and were uncensored for the most part. Therefore, they reflected similar events as television but they also put across various opinions, particularly in cartoons such as the one in Source L. To a lesser extent, radio also informed people of what was happening in Vietnam. There was also the growing pop culture in the US. Protest singers such as Bob Dillan influenced other people's opinions by putting across theirs in such a creative medium. Songs such as the one in Source K effectively put across their opinions in a poignant manner that made people stop and think about whether the war was right or not.
In conclusion, I would say that there were definitely other reasons for the change in the public's attitudes to the war but I think that television was the most important. Television allowed the public to actually see what was happening right at the front line. I think television raised public awareness enormously and provided the public with hard, uncensored facts, facts that had never been open to the public, in previous wars.
