Vietnam: Justified or Not?
Jon Schmidt
Professor Cyril Daddieh
POL 102
6 March 2013
Vietnam: Justified or not? Vietnam, although not technically considered a war was an extended conflict that still had to be justified to an American people. The Tonkin Gulf Resolution was the identification of this extended conflict and was declared by Congress in 1964 making this conflict official. This resolution was justified because it was declared by a competent authority and was seen as being the best thing for the American people at the time, even though today it receives a lot of pessimism from those same Americans. Many would say that we should not have been in Vietnam in the first place and that we were yet again pretending to play the role of global peacekeeper, others would say that we were just promoting our own interests. The U.S role in Vietnam first started in the late 50’s as a mission to help the French with their territory in Indochina. As U.S allies, the U.S was obligated to help France in its territory and try to end any aggression towards them and if helping an ally, conflict is justified. The true extent of the United States involvement did not really start until the communist division of North Vietnam and South Vietnam after France lost control over its original territory. When asking whether the beginning of a conflict, if not war, is justified the party that is taking the action chiefly has to question whether the human rights of the citizens are put in question or not. As with any Capitalist nation, it is a goal to fight communism when possible on a global scale because it threatens the people of that country as a whole. This threat comes not only from the likelihood of the country to oppress its populace, but also because by fundamental nature, communistic countries do not trade with Capitalist ones. This conflict was also justified when examining Just War Theory because a country is allowed to protect itself from possible future aggression. One of the chief concerns held by
Professor Cyril Daddieh
POL 102
6 March 2013
Vietnam: Justified or not? Vietnam, although not technically considered a war was an extended conflict that still had to be justified to an American people. The Tonkin Gulf Resolution was the identification of this extended conflict and was declared by Congress in 1964 making this conflict official. This resolution was justified because it was declared by a competent authority and was seen as being the best thing for the American people at the time, even though today it receives a lot of pessimism from those same Americans. Many would say that we should not have been in Vietnam in the first place and that we were yet again pretending to play the role of global peacekeeper, others would say that we were just promoting our own interests. The U.S role in Vietnam first started in the late 50’s as a mission to help the French with their territory in Indochina. As U.S allies, the U.S was obligated to help France in its territory and try to end any aggression towards them and if helping an ally, conflict is justified. The true extent of the United States involvement did not really start until the communist division of North Vietnam and South Vietnam after France lost control over its original territory. When asking whether the beginning of a conflict, if not war, is justified the party that is taking the action chiefly has to question whether the human rights of the citizens are put in question or not. As with any Capitalist nation, it is a goal to fight communism when possible on a global scale because it threatens the people of that country as a whole. This threat comes not only from the likelihood of the country to oppress its populace, but also because by fundamental nature, communistic countries do not trade with Capitalist ones. This conflict was also justified when examining Just War Theory because a country is allowed to protect itself from possible future aggression. One of the chief concerns held by