Source E is a photograph of napalm victims. It was published during the Vietnam War. These children were fleeing from their homes in Trang Bang. This incident took place on June the 8th in 1972. A napalm bomb was accidentally thrown on this city by a South Vietnamese air force plane. The bomb was thrown on the village 25 miles outside of Saigon. These innocent children were running for there lives trying to get away. This image was widely published during the Vietnam War.
This image is not propaganda. It is clear sighted and is an objective image. The image may seem to be subjective however the photographer, Nick Ut did not select a view. He was lucky enough to take this picture. The moment the little girl ran past him he started to take pictures. He didn’t have enough time to thin about what angles he would be taking the pictures at or things of that sort. The American people back home would have seen this image and thus they would have seen the innocent children, who had nothing to do with the war, suffering due to napalm attacks. This lead to shock and the reality of war struck people all over the world.
The little girl in the image actually survived the attack. Her name is Phan Thi Kim Phuc. She was around the age of 11 when this incident occurred. She was fleeing from the village of Trang Bang. Her body had come in contact with napalm. She had ripped off her clothes which were burning due to napalm. The person who photographed this image is called Nick Ut. Nick Ut recalls that two sky raider aircrafts of the VNAF bombed the edge of the village near the Cai Dai Pagoda. The bombing was carried out in a pattern. First there were explosive bombs, then incendiary bombs and it ended with heavy machine gun fire. After this the planes disappeared. Then wounded and burnt villagers came running out. The photographer also recalls that the girl was screaming “Nong qua, nong qua” as she ran past him, which when translated means “too hot, too hot”. We can tell that the little girl was in pain by looking at her expression in the photograph. Nick Ut had actually save Kim Phuc’s life as he was the person that took her to the Provincial Vietnamese Hospital in Cu Chi, half way to Saigon. Nick Ut left the Hospital after Kim was on the operating table and he was sure that she would be looked after. He left to head towards Saigon to bring his film to the AP.
The image showed the brutality of the American military and the American public back home would have been shocked and maybe even embarrassed after looking at this image . This image may have influenced people to change their views on the situation in Vietnam and they would most probably want American troops to return home and leave Vietnam for good.
If we take a look at the image we can see that both of the children are running. The image focuses more on the girl as her body was being burnt by the napalm. Behind the children Americans are recording what was happening. These Americans were probably against the war and they probably wanted the people to see the effects the war was having on the people on Vietnam, especially the innocent who didn’t have anything to do with the war.
This source was purposely made so that people all over the world, especially the American public could see how the war had devastating effects on the Vietnamese people. We can tell my looking at the photograph that the media was hostile towards the war and this is put forward through the image showing us the bad side and the effects of war.
This source is reliable because shows events that took place at the time of the war and the image has not been tampered with which makes this image very useful in presenting the results of America’s actions upon innocent civilians.
The American politicians were too busy with politics to take note of what was happening and how they were losing the support of their own people. This image confirms the fact that America had to leave Vietnam do to the power of TV as we already know that this was being recorded by the media and thus people would have viewed this on TV. This would definitely change people views and force them to see the devastation caused by America’s involvement in the war especially as they would be seeing how innocent people were being targeted in the war.
Source F:
Source F is a newspaper account written by Richard Hamer an American Journalist who was writing in 1970. By looking at this piece of text we can tell that Hamer was against the tactics America was using to fight the war in Vietnam. He states that they were using napalm on civilians, blasting hamlets to dust with high explosives from jet planes, defoliating vegetation and deforming people with chemicals but he says this in a manner in which we are made to think that America should not be doing this if they are trying to get the people on their side.
This source is not censored. The main point given out within this source was that America was failing to win over the people and therefore they could have not possibly won the war. The key concept of winning over a group of people in terms of any situation including war is communication. You need to be able to communicate effectively with the people as this means that you understand each other and therefore it is easier to get people on your side. America lacked this skill because they could not communicate with the Vietnamese civilians/people as they did not speak the same language. This meant that they did not understand each other and therefore how was America to win over the people? There was barely any communication between the Americans and the Vietnamese people and this is why it was easier for the Vietcong to win over the Vietnamese people as they were able to communicate with them.
The Americans used horrific methods and tactics while fighting the Vietminh. These methods not only affected the opposing troops but also affected the Vietnamese civilians. Whole villages where bombed with napalm. Napalm is a chemical weapon of wars which were used in bombs, thrown over Vietnam by the USA used to burn whole areas of land and incinerate land. It is highly flammable and if it touches the body it sticks to the body and burn through the human flesh. It was used by the Americans over Vietnamese villages. Napalm was also used by the American in the war to clear landing zones for helicopters. In the article it says “one does not use napalm…if one is attempting to persuade these people of the rightness of ones cause”. This influences the public/ audience to believe that America was using wrong methods as they were attacking innocent people along with attacking troops.
The Americans also set whole villages alight in Zippo raids. They used to set straw huts alight and eventually the whole village would be set alight. Not only this but the Americans used a chemical called ‘Agent Orange’ on the Vietnamese forests. This chemical stripped the trees of all there leaves. It was used so the Americans could easily spot the Vietcong and could clearly see were they were hiding. Whole forests were destroyed. The chemical also affected the Vietnamese people. People were giving birth to deformed babies due to the chemical getting into their bodies. There was also another Chemical used called ‘Agent Blue’ which destroyed the harvesting or rice. There was also another chemical known as ‘Agent White’.
The author of this source, Richard Hamer, despised of American methods to “woo” the people or so it seems in this article. Of course he was a writer and he wanted to make money but this does not mean that he was only writing what the people would find interesting; he was putting down his own views on paper and by the looks of it he didn’t not approve of American methods.
The author of this source questions America’s actions and by reading this article we also make sense of what he is saying. At the time that this article was published, the views of the American public varied a lot from when the Vietnam War had first started. This article could be classified as a piece of text that influenced people to see the wrong doings and wrong methods that America was using.
This source is does portray Richard Hamer’s personal feelings about Americas involvement in Vietnam therefore it can be seen as being biased as this would give the American public one negative view on Americas actions. In order for the source not to be biased we would have to be given a positive factor of America’s involvement in the war however this is not the case in this article.
The reliability of this source is at question as this source could be classed as being fairly reliable but then again it is one mans opinion and therefore we cannot be sure if this opinion is a fact in itself.
This source is insufficient evidence as it does not prove that the power of television forced America to leave Vietnam. It is however useful is helping us to understand why America was not able to win over the Vietnamese people and how the American methods left Vietnam devastated.
Source G:
Source G is the reaction of an American soldier after having heard about the My Lai massacre. 347 unarmed civilians were killed at My Lai. The angry, agitated men of Charlie Company, 11th brigade, American division entered the village of My Lai on March the 16th 1968. The killing began a short time after. Approximately 347 people including children, women and the elderly were killed. Several old men were bayoneted, praying women and children where shot in the back of the head, and apparently one girl was raped and then killed, or so a witness’s account says.
The author of the source gives his opinion on the My Lai Massacre after being informed about the massacre. The author is unknown. This source is a primary source as it comes from the time of the war.
News of this atrocious event did not reach the American public until November 1969.Journalist Seymour Hersh published a story with details of his conversations with a Vietnam veteran called Ron Ridenhour. Before Ron Ridenhour spoke to Hersh, he had appealed to the congress the pentagon and the white house to investigate this matter and the result of the investigation was that Calley’s was charged with murder in September 1969.Hersh’s story was published two months later.
The news of the massacre led to shock throughout the American public. Many people began to see how the conduct and morale of the American Army had dwindled. Was this the America everybody knew? Is this why America went into Vietnam, to kill innocent people?
This source shows that things went wrong with the American policy. The soldiers never went into Vietnam to behave like “Nazis” they went in to fight for their country. They “went in to service”. This is implying that the soldiers went their for a good cause, for their country but the ended up behaving like savages. The soldier’s reaction to this is that he knows what happened was wrong but he also knows that the soldier’s intentions were not wrong. They went in with a good heart but didn’t realise what they were doing.
The My Lai massacre came as a shock to the American public and establishment. Soldiers themselves were shocked and ashamed. This solider is not an eyewitness but he had heard about the massacre and was giving his opinion on why it took place. We can tell that the solider is disappointed by what happened. He is also ashamed at how the soldiers behaved yet he does mention that they did not intentionally behave in this way.
What made the incident even more embarrassing was the fact that straight after the killing, the Americans tried to cover it up. The Americans also tired to cover up the bombing in Cambodia and Laos. The My Lai Massacre took place in 1968. This was also the last period of the Tet Offensive. On the 31st of January 1968, 70, 000 North Vietnamese soldiers launched the Tet Offensive. It was called the Tet Offensive because it started on the Buddhist New Year. The North Vietnamese soldiers arranged a surprise attack on more than 100 towns/cities in Vietnam. The National Liberation Front attacked the US Embassy in Saigon and they also captured Saigon’s main radio station. The Tet Offensive was a real turning point for the war and it showed that America would not be able to defeat the North Vietnamese easily. 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. On March 31st 1968 Johnson decided to halt the bombing in Vietnam and also decided he did not want to be re-elected. The My Lai Massacre had influenced President Johnson to make this decision. He was loosing public support and he knew that he was becoming increasingly unpopular. The My Lai massacre came as a shock to the American public and probably made then even angrier at the thought that President Johnson got America involved in Vietnam.
This source is insufficient in proving that America left Vietnam due to the power of television. It however gives other reasons. The author conveys his disappointment to the incident that took place and his reasons for the incident occurring were the American soldiers being mislead due to their age. We can see were the solider was coming from because many of the Americans that were in the war were very young and inexperienced and thus this could pose as a reason for the situation that took place.
Source H:
Source H is a cartoon which was published in the British magazine “Punch” in 1967. This magazine was aimed at British people interested in current affairs e.g. posh, rich businessmen would probably read this magazine.
The cartoon is basically showing how America’s great society is being chopped up to fuel the war in Vietnam. The cartoon could be seen as holding a mirror that is showing the reflection of what is happening. If you look closely at the cartoon, there is one particular man that stands out on the train. The man holding the axe is supposed be President Lyndon Johnson and the fact that he is the main character in this cartoon and also he is the one that is holding the axe and chopping the wood shows that he is firmly being held account for the war. This would give the British people a negative view of President Johnson as it tells them that he is to blame for the war in Vietnam and it is his fault that the devastating events are taking place In Vietnam. We can tell that that the British people are not very supportive of the war because of the way it is being portrayed to them though different media such as this cartoon.
The cartoon shows two railway tracks. On one of the tracks is the American train (symbolising the effects of the Vietnam War) and the other railway track is empty. This shows us that America could have taken another route. They could have chosen to follow another path, a path that may not have led to such devastating effects. This made the audience think about America’s decision to get involved in Vietnam and also influenced them to think about how the situation would be different If America chose to follow another path.
The engine of the train represents America. As you can see the wood is being passed across the train and is being put into the fire. The wood symbolises what the money could have been used for but instead it is being used to fuel the war and the cartoon shows exactly that as it shows the wood being moved along and then thrown in to the fire. The result of this is the damage and destruction in Vietnam. The smoke symbolises this. If you look at the smoke coming out of the train you will see that it says Vietnam. The smoke is caused by the burning of the wood so basically the damage in Vietnam is being caused by the US’s wrong decisions and action such as chopping up the “Great Society”.
The cartoon is very anti-war and we can see this as it is portraying the war in Vietnam as being bad and having a bad effect on Vietnam itself. The Cartoon therefore influenced the audience to see America as being bad as it showed them the effect of their wrong decision of going in to Vietnam therefore people that would have thought America had made the right decision by going into Vietnam would probably change there views after looking at this cartoon. This cartoon would probably not alone be enough to change a persons view but however it would encourage people to consider what would happen if America had decided to use there money and power in another way and also gets them to think about what would happen if America did not involve themselves in the war.
America’s involvement in Vietnam had a huge negative impact not only on Vietnam but also on America itself. President Johnson had to consider the consequences of his actions everyday. Gradually, as the war proceeded there were not enough people who were volunteering to fight the war. The government responded to this by instituting a draft. The American public were not happy at what they were seeing. Deaths were increasing and the war in Vietnam was ongoing. Many people started to protest. First these protests started in major cities and college campuses at. However by 1968 the whole country seemed to be responding to the impact of the war. The public wanted America to leave Vietnam once and for all.
The cartoon is basically showing us that America’s decision to go into Vietnam was wrong. As we already know there were elections held in 1964. President Johnson knew that a tough Vietnam policy would go down with the voters. On his election he declared; “I am not going to be the president who saw south East Asia go the way China went”. This itself was big statement. Johnson was tying himself down to the American policy and after he won the election he had to stick to his words. He had to involve himself in Vietnam otherwise the American public would see him as being weak.
This source is biased because is only gives a one sided view. It only shows us how America’s actions led to the devastation in Vietnam but it does not show us the positive or beneficial side/factors of America’s actions and involvement in Vietnam.
This source is insufficient evidence in proving that America left Vietnam due to the power of television however it does show other reasons for America leaving Vietnam such as the break down of the great society. We know that the American people were becoming more influenced by the devastating effects of the war in Vietnam which they were able to see via Television. Also other countries all over the world such as Britain were seeing the effects of the war. The Vietnam War was the first war to be highly televised and this was a major reason for America losing support and thus in the end leaving Vietnam. However alongside TV other media such as newspapers, radio, and magazines were also influencing people and changing there views. TV may have been the main reason but it wasn’t the only reason and therefore we can see how this cartoon also played a part in shaping and changing the public’s views.
Source J:
Source J is a photograph from an American school textbook. It shows anti-war demonstrations at Kent State University in 1970. This is a secondary source. Although we know that it is easy to tamper with photographs we can see that this photograph has not been tampered with. It is very clear sighted and is an objective photograph as we can see that the view hasn’t been selected in order to portray a certain point or focus on a certain object. It is just a photograph in general of a demonstration.
This image can be regarded as propaganda as it was most predominantly made so that it can be drafted. The photograph shows the views of people at that time and place. We can tell that the people were angry and frustrated by the situation in Vietnam and this comes across clearly to us if we look at the signs. The signs say things such as “stop all bombing”, “fight poverty”, “stop the war in Vietnam”. This tells us that the people had had enough and wanted to stop America from carrying on with the war in Vietnam.
If you look at the image you can see that the demonstrators are made up of a variety of people both old and young and both men and women although there is a larger proportion of men in the crowd. This shows that not only men were concerned by the war but also women were influenced by the involvement of America in the war and this leads us to believe that the war in Vietnam was not only affecting the soldiers and civilians in Vietnam but it was also affecting the men and women and the American public in general at home.
At the bottom of the photograph we can see the heads of three people. They are facing the demonstrators and this shows that they may be encouraging them and influencing them and shaping there views about the Vietnam situation. The three people seem to look young and we can say this by looking at there heads which show shiny, young healthy hair so it is most likely that these people are probably quiet young and they might in fact be students from the university who are giving there opinions to the demonstrators.
I think that the source was produced to shows how not only people fighting in the Vietnam war were being affected but also people back in America were being affected. Also people did not like what they were seeing/ hearing via media and they wanted Americans troops to return.
This source is not biased as it shows an event that took place and this photograph was used in textbooks for educational purposes to teach the students about the situations that had arisen due to the American involvement in Vietnam.
This source is useful as it shows us how people reacted to the situation that was occurring in Vietnam and it shows the views of the public. This helps us in some ways to see why America had to leave Vietnam as we can briefly sum up from this photograph that America was losing public support and this would cause problems for the American politicians who were for the was along with President Johnson.
Source K:
Source K is a Gallup poll which took place in Australia during the period of 1969-1970. Australia became involved in the Vietnam War and Australian troops were sent in to Vietnam to help the Americans. The Australians were good in jungle warfare and they knew the terrain. This source was produced to get the Australian publics views on weather Troops should return or carry on fighting the Vietnam war.
Source K is a table showing the opinions of the Australian public on whether they wanted there forces to continue in the war or be brought back home over a period of years. This source may have been produced by the media or the government. It is however not a secret document as it was meant to be a survey for the public to carry out. We do not know if this source has been tampered with but there is a high chance that it has not been tampered with as the results of this survey would not have lead to any major affect or change. It was simply just a survey to find out what the public thought and how the views changed over time.
If we look at the figures we can see that in April 1969 the majority of people wanted their forces to continue on in Vietnam. It was however fairly equal as 40% of people wanted their forces to be brought back and 48% wanted their forces to continue. 12% of people left it undecided and this shows that in 1969 a vast number of people did not know weather it would be beneficial to allow their forces to carry on in Vietnam or not. This shows that many people did not really know about the situation in Vietnam at the time.
In October 1969, 6 months after the first survey the results had changed. The majority of people wanted their forces to be brought back. The percentage of people that wanted their forces to carry on had decreased to 39%. This shows that they were losing public support. Also more people had now formed an opinion as there were a lower percentage of people (10%) that had left it undecided.
The year after, October 1970 the majority of people still wanted their forces to be brought back home although the figures had decreased from the year before. More people wanted there forces to continue however more people now had formed a view as there was a fewer percentage of people who left it undecided.
This source cannot be seen as being very reliable because we cannot be sure that the same number of people form the Australian public were asked this after a year and thus the results could be fairly inaccurate.
The source is merely a table presenting information. No feelings are being put across in this source. I think the purpose of this source was to see how the publics opinions changed over a year’s time and this would have probably been related back to the war.
This is insufficient evidence as it does not proof that America left Vietnam due to Television. This does not relate to television although it helps us to see how as the war went on more and more people wanted their forces to be brought back home. This was probably due to the fact that they saw how the war was affecting the people of Vietnam as well as their troops and they saw the war as being pointless.
Source L: We were soldiers
‘We were Soldiers’ is a movie/film that was released in 2001.It is based on the Battle of La Drang in 1965. This was the first major engagement of American troops in Vietnam. The movie is based on a book called ‘We Were Soldiers Once… And Young’ written by Lieutenant General (Ret.) Hal Moore and reporter Joseph L. Galloway. Both these men were present in that battle. This film would be regarded as being a secondary source as it was created after the Vietnam War.
Randall Wallace is the director of this film. The film stars Mel Gibson, Madeleine Stowe, Dylan Walsh, Barry Pepper, Greg Kinnear, Don Duong, Kerry Russell, Chris Klein, and Sam Elliot.
The start of the movie is about a French army who are patrolling Vietnam during the first Indo-China war. The army is attacked and over run by the North Vietnamese. After this event the movie goes forward in time to the year of 1965. The story is about how Colonel Hall Moore leads his men into the La Drang Valley in Vietnam. The story also focuses on the difficulties faced back at home were women take the job of delivering telegrams to friends and relatives about the deaths of soldiers. They soldiers go into battle. One of the US battalion is hugely out numbered by the North Vietnamese division. At the end of the movie the Americans leave once all the men have been recovered from the battle field.
This movie was made after the war. It was not made for historical reasons but as a form of entertainment to viewers therefore it isn’t reliable because this means the scenes and events could be over exaggerated or altered to make the movie look more drastic and more ‘Hollywood’.
This movie is not a form of propaganda as it was not produced at the time of the war. For this reason it was not produced to influence people into taking sides or anything of the sort. The movie was purely a form of entertainment based on a book and true event that took place in Vietnam.
As we already know Hollywood movies like this tend to over exaggerate and focus on certain aspects of the theme. Therefore we cannot look at this movie and say without doubt that it is accurate because this would be false.
This source does not prove that television caused the Americans to leave Vietnam. In the source there are other reasons for the defeat of the Americans. These reasons include the enemy out numbering the American troops.
In my opinion the main aim of this source was to show the audience how heroic and courageous the Americans were. Even though they were out numbered they put up a good fight. They showed true togetherness and they would never leave another American on the battle field. The men cared for each other and worked as a unit. Even though the Americans lost the war they fought bravely and that’s what made them true men. The film favours the Americans in that even though the Vietnamese win the war, the main focus is on the American troops and how they struggled and carried on in Vietnam. They may not have been portrayed in a very heroic way but they are not shown as being the ‘losers’ either.
