The Tet Offensive During The Vietnam War
The Vietnam War was considered one of the longest foreign wars that the United States fought in, up until the Afghan War. Like most wars there is many events that occur during them and for the Vietnam one event that stood out was the Tet Offensive. The Tet Offensive was an attempt for Vietnamese communist to gain back control and cause a wedge between the U.S. and the South Vietnamese. To develop a better perspective of the Tet Offensive, it would help to Know the Vietnamese communist perspective, What the Americans were being told, an individual who experienced it and how it still affects us today. Developing an opinion that is not solely based off biased information we need to hear what happened from many different perspectives.
When it …show more content…
comes to the Tet Offensive we hear about how it was a turning point for Americans and the non-communist side but do not hear much on the Vietnamese communist perception. In “Decision-making leading to the Tet Offensive (1968)—The Vietnamese Communist Perspective” Ang Cheng Guan writes about the communist perspective of the decisions leading to the Tet offensive. Throughout the reading Guan introduces many people, he especially introduces the men who were responsible for the Tet Offensives “In the event, while the Tet Offensive was largely Thanh’s idea, what took place after 6 July 1967 was Giap’s responsibility” (347). As we notice Guan mentions whose idea it was “Thanh’s” and who followed through with it “Giap”. By introducing these men by their names it allows the reader to feel more connected to them and It is useful information on who helped orchestrate the Tet Offensive. Not only does Guan write about the people, he also writes about all the meetings that took place. Guan writes about how the communist spent their time “the communist spent much of the second half of 1967 mobilizing and making preparations for the General Offensive-General Uprising” (348). Notice how he mentions the “second half of 1967” this shows that the Vietnamese communist spent many months planning what they would do and how they would do it. This is important because it allows the readers to have a clearer understanding of the Tet offensive. Guan gives readers the ability to learn about a different side of the Tet Offensive that is not widely shared and could possibly help get a clearer understanding as to why the Vietnamese Communist did what they did. Not only is it helpful to know their side but it can be helpful to know what Americans were being told.
When trying to develop an opinion on a historical event it can be helpful to know what civilians are being told and how the Commanding officer operated. In Part 1 Tet “The surprise” Jake Blood talks about before Tet happened and then leading to the Tet Offensive. Blood writes about Westmoreland, a commanding general and what the Americans got to hear from him and what was happening with the war. “Westmoreland told the nation that US troops could begin withdrawing in two years” (4). Notice how Blood shared that Westmoreland told the nation that troops could withdraw in two years, this shows the readers what Americans were being told. This is important because it gives the readers a better understanding of what the Americans were being told. Blood goes into detail of where they started placing troops in certain cities, one being Khe Sanh because they believed it would be attacked. Blood goes into more detail of the day Tet unleashed “True to the assessment given by Davidson, the enemy launched its offensive early on the morning of 31 January” (6). Notice the word “assessment” was used, this shows that based on prior events Davidson predicted that the attacks would happen early. This is important because it allows the readers to get an understanding that soldiers might could have been more prepared for the attacks. By Blood sharing all this information, readers can start to develop their own opinion about the Tet Offensive, however it is still important to get a perspective from someone who witnessed it first-hand.
It is easy to develop an opinion about people or events when looking up general information, however; when people start to read about individuals who have experienced the event our opinions may start to change.
In Ground Pounder: A Marine’s journey through South Vietnam Gregory V. Short is a marine who fought in the Vietnam war and in his book he gives information about General William Childs Westmoreland who was a commanding general during the Vietnam War. Short informs his readers on the struggles any commander would face during the war because “For he, along with the rest of American armed forces, had been put in a hopeless situation, brought about the politics of a young nation suddenly finding itself as a world power” (Short66). By Shorts using the word “hopeless” it is exposing some of his feelings towards the war. This is important because it allows the readers to understand how a marine might have felt about a war he was fighting in. Shorts continues to talk about the beliefs Westmoreland had while in command and the types of request made “For every new enemy action, he would press the politicians back in Washington for more troops and fewer rules” (67-68). Notice how Shorts describes that Westmoreland would push for more troops and less rules, this shows what type of commander Westmoreland was. This is important because it helps readers get a perspective of the type of commanding general troops had to work under and how the Tet offensive went the way it did. After writing about Westmoreland and the scenery he was around, Short made it clear about how he felt about the war in itself “If anyone had told me that we shouldn’t even be in Vietnam, I would have laughed in his or her face” (78). By saying that he would laugh in his or her face, Short is saying that he disagreed with people when they said we shouldn’t be in Vietnam. This is important because it helps readers gain a new perspective from a person who fought in a war so many disagreed with. Reading
about the Westmoreland from Gregory Short gives readers a more personal perspective because he witnessed what was happening and able to explain it in a way only a person who was there can. What Short describes gives a little detail in how Tet is still affecting us today through the media and other wars.
To fully gain an understanding of the Tet Offensive and develop a better perspective of it, it is important to know the effects it left behind. James S. Robbins writes about how the Tet Offensive is still playing a role in war. Robbins starts off talking about how Tet was a symbolic attack and that “Tet is kept alive by the pervasive use of analogy in public discourse—not as an analytical framework to better understand or contextualize events but as a form of shorthand used to brand those events for media consumption” (49-50). By saying that Tet was being kept alive to use a brand that media can use, Robbins is explaining one of the ways Tet is still being used. This is important because it allows the readers to gain more knowledge on the way society is still using Tet. Robbins writes a lot about the media and how it can be used as an advantage for terrorist. Robbins quotes what Osama bin Laden had to say about the current war in Iraq and how it relates to the Vietnam War. Not only Does Robbins share what terrorist had to say that involved using Tet as an example, he also shares events that were compared to Tet offensive and why. One example that was compared to Tet was “Operation Phantom Fury, the assault that reestablished control over Fallujah in November 2004, was likewise compared to Tet” (Robbins55). By using the word “reestablished” Robbins is showing that the Tet Offensive was about reestablishing control and other operations are trying to do the same thing. This is important because it provides more solid evidence of how the Tet Offensive is still playing a role in other wars.
By reading all the different perspectives one is able to develop an opinion based on different perspective of the Tet Offensive. Many of the perspectives can sound the same, however; they are perspectives from different people who had different experiences. Ang Cheng Guan gives readers the perspective of Vietnamese Communist and what decisions were made leading up to the Tet Offensive, while Jake blood shares the perspective of how the Americans were attempting to prepare for an event like Tet along with what the commanding general was telling Americans. Not only was it important to know the events leading up to the Tet offensive, it is important to get the perspective of someone who experienced the war from the battle field which is what Gregory V. Short did in his book. As James S. Robbins writes in “An Old, Old Story” Tet is still affecting us today and will as long as the media continues to let. By getting perspectives from all sides and seeing how it still is affecting us today, we can learn how to avoid repeating it.
When it …show more content…
comes to the Tet Offensive we hear about how it was a turning point for Americans and the non-communist side but do not hear much on the Vietnamese communist perception. In “Decision-making leading to the Tet Offensive (1968)—The Vietnamese Communist Perspective” Ang Cheng Guan writes about the communist perspective of the decisions leading to the Tet offensive. Throughout the reading Guan introduces many people, he especially introduces the men who were responsible for the Tet Offensives “In the event, while the Tet Offensive was largely Thanh’s idea, what took place after 6 July 1967 was Giap’s responsibility” (347). As we notice Guan mentions whose idea it was “Thanh’s” and who followed through with it “Giap”. By introducing these men by their names it allows the reader to feel more connected to them and It is useful information on who helped orchestrate the Tet Offensive. Not only does Guan write about the people, he also writes about all the meetings that took place. Guan writes about how the communist spent their time “the communist spent much of the second half of 1967 mobilizing and making preparations for the General Offensive-General Uprising” (348). Notice how he mentions the “second half of 1967” this shows that the Vietnamese communist spent many months planning what they would do and how they would do it. This is important because it allows the readers to have a clearer understanding of the Tet offensive. Guan gives readers the ability to learn about a different side of the Tet Offensive that is not widely shared and could possibly help get a clearer understanding as to why the Vietnamese Communist did what they did. Not only is it helpful to know their side but it can be helpful to know what Americans were being told.
When trying to develop an opinion on a historical event it can be helpful to know what civilians are being told and how the Commanding officer operated. In Part 1 Tet “The surprise” Jake Blood talks about before Tet happened and then leading to the Tet Offensive. Blood writes about Westmoreland, a commanding general and what the Americans got to hear from him and what was happening with the war. “Westmoreland told the nation that US troops could begin withdrawing in two years” (4). Notice how Blood shared that Westmoreland told the nation that troops could withdraw in two years, this shows the readers what Americans were being told. This is important because it gives the readers a better understanding of what the Americans were being told. Blood goes into detail of where they started placing troops in certain cities, one being Khe Sanh because they believed it would be attacked. Blood goes into more detail of the day Tet unleashed “True to the assessment given by Davidson, the enemy launched its offensive early on the morning of 31 January” (6). Notice the word “assessment” was used, this shows that based on prior events Davidson predicted that the attacks would happen early. This is important because it allows the readers to get an understanding that soldiers might could have been more prepared for the attacks. By Blood sharing all this information, readers can start to develop their own opinion about the Tet Offensive, however it is still important to get a perspective from someone who witnessed it first-hand.
It is easy to develop an opinion about people or events when looking up general information, however; when people start to read about individuals who have experienced the event our opinions may start to change.
In Ground Pounder: A Marine’s journey through South Vietnam Gregory V. Short is a marine who fought in the Vietnam war and in his book he gives information about General William Childs Westmoreland who was a commanding general during the Vietnam War. Short informs his readers on the struggles any commander would face during the war because “For he, along with the rest of American armed forces, had been put in a hopeless situation, brought about the politics of a young nation suddenly finding itself as a world power” (Short66). By Shorts using the word “hopeless” it is exposing some of his feelings towards the war. This is important because it allows the readers to understand how a marine might have felt about a war he was fighting in. Shorts continues to talk about the beliefs Westmoreland had while in command and the types of request made “For every new enemy action, he would press the politicians back in Washington for more troops and fewer rules” (67-68). Notice how Shorts describes that Westmoreland would push for more troops and less rules, this shows what type of commander Westmoreland was. This is important because it helps readers get a perspective of the type of commanding general troops had to work under and how the Tet offensive went the way it did. After writing about Westmoreland and the scenery he was around, Short made it clear about how he felt about the war in itself “If anyone had told me that we shouldn’t even be in Vietnam, I would have laughed in his or her face” (78). By saying that he would laugh in his or her face, Short is saying that he disagreed with people when they said we shouldn’t be in Vietnam. This is important because it helps readers gain a new perspective from a person who fought in a war so many disagreed with. Reading
about the Westmoreland from Gregory Short gives readers a more personal perspective because he witnessed what was happening and able to explain it in a way only a person who was there can. What Short describes gives a little detail in how Tet is still affecting us today through the media and other wars.
To fully gain an understanding of the Tet Offensive and develop a better perspective of it, it is important to know the effects it left behind. James S. Robbins writes about how the Tet Offensive is still playing a role in war. Robbins starts off talking about how Tet was a symbolic attack and that “Tet is kept alive by the pervasive use of analogy in public discourse—not as an analytical framework to better understand or contextualize events but as a form of shorthand used to brand those events for media consumption” (49-50). By saying that Tet was being kept alive to use a brand that media can use, Robbins is explaining one of the ways Tet is still being used. This is important because it allows the readers to gain more knowledge on the way society is still using Tet. Robbins writes a lot about the media and how it can be used as an advantage for terrorist. Robbins quotes what Osama bin Laden had to say about the current war in Iraq and how it relates to the Vietnam War. Not only Does Robbins share what terrorist had to say that involved using Tet as an example, he also shares events that were compared to Tet offensive and why. One example that was compared to Tet was “Operation Phantom Fury, the assault that reestablished control over Fallujah in November 2004, was likewise compared to Tet” (Robbins55). By using the word “reestablished” Robbins is showing that the Tet Offensive was about reestablishing control and other operations are trying to do the same thing. This is important because it provides more solid evidence of how the Tet Offensive is still playing a role in other wars.
By reading all the different perspectives one is able to develop an opinion based on different perspective of the Tet Offensive. Many of the perspectives can sound the same, however; they are perspectives from different people who had different experiences. Ang Cheng Guan gives readers the perspective of Vietnamese Communist and what decisions were made leading up to the Tet Offensive, while Jake blood shares the perspective of how the Americans were attempting to prepare for an event like Tet along with what the commanding general was telling Americans. Not only was it important to know the events leading up to the Tet offensive, it is important to get the perspective of someone who experienced the war from the battle field which is what Gregory V. Short did in his book. As James S. Robbins writes in “An Old, Old Story” Tet is still affecting us today and will as long as the media continues to let. By getting perspectives from all sides and seeing how it still is affecting us today, we can learn how to avoid repeating it.