President Lyndon Johnson's Defense of the U.S. Presence in Vietnam (1965)
In July 1965 U.S. involvement in Vietnam was escalating. That month, President Johnson had approved an immediate increase in American troop strength to 125,000, with a commitment to raise that number to 200,000 by years end. But the speech that Johnson gave to defend his actions in Vietnam was not delivered to Congress, nor was it a prime-time television event. Rather, it was given at a press conference and, according to Johnsons advisers in later interviews, was meant to be as low-key as possible.
. . . Three times in my lifetime, in two world wars and in Korea, Americans have gone to far lands to fight for freedom. We have learned at a terrible and brutal cost that retreat does not bring safety and weakness does not bring peace.
It is this lesson that has brought us to Viet-Nam. This is a different kind of war. There are no marching armies or solemn declarations. Some citizens of South Viet-Nam, at times with understandable grievances, have joined in the attack on their own government.
But we must not let this mask the central fact that this is really war. It is guided by North Viet-Nam, and it is spurred by Communist China. Its goal is to conquer the South, to defeat American power, and to extend the Asiatic dominion of communism.
There are great stakes in the balance.
Most of the non-Communist nations of Asia cannot, by themselves and alone, resist the growing might and the grasping ambition of Asian Communism.
Our power, therefore, is a very vital shield. If we are driven from the field in Viet-Nam, then no nation can ever again have the same confidence in American promise or in American protection.
In each land the forces of independence would be considerably weakened and an Asia so threatened by Communist domination would certainly imperil the security of the United States itself.
We did not choose to be the guardians at the gate, but there is no one else.
Nor would surrender in Viet-Nam bring peace, because we learned from Hitler at Munich that success only feeds the appetite of aggression. The battle would be renewed in one country and then another country, bringing with it perhaps even larger and crueler conflict, as we have learned from the lessons of history.
Moreover, we are in Viet-Nam to fulfill one of the most solemn pledges of the American nation. Three Presidents--President Eisenhower, President Kennedy, and your present President--over 11 years have committed themselves and have promised to help defend this small and valiant nation.
Strengthened by that promise, the people of South Viet-Nam have fought for many long years. Thousands of them have died. Thousands more have been crippled and scarred by war. We just cannot now dishonor our word, or abandon our commitment, or leave those who believed us and who trusted us to the terror and repression and murder that would follow.
This, then, my fellow Americans, is why we are in Viet-Nam.
Document Analysis
Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. policy in Vietnam in a single sentence? What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement?
What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam?
How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George W. Bushs explanation of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq?
1.Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. policy in Vietnam in a single sentence? What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement?
The U.S. must stay in Vietnam to stop communism from overflowing through Asia and threatening he rest of the world including the U.S. The main points he makes in defending Vietnam is the fact that if we do pull out of Vietnam than we appear weak to other countries and they would lose confidence in our ability to aid them. He also speaks of stopping communism in a small country like Vietnam rather than let the Vietcong take it and allow communism to flourish in Asia.
2.What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam?If the U.S. pulls out of Veitnam then Johnson argues that Communism will have no limits and will be able to strengthen and spread all across Asia and possibly beyond, threatening both the U.S. and its allies. This scenario is almost like a doomsday scenario (WWIII) where the U.S. is powerless to stop its enemies. 3.How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George W. Bushs explanation of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq?Johnsons explanation for involvement in Vietnam is very similar to Bushs explanation for entry into Iraq and Afghanistan. Like Johnson, Bush argued that if we pulled out of Iraq than the terrorists would overtake the country and would create a breeding ground from which terrorists could spread to other countries and threaten the U.S. Bush also argued that if we pull out of Iraq than we would appear weak and lose the confidence of our allies (and the deterring fear of our enemies).
1. US presence in Vietnam is necessary to protect our borders from the threat of Communism, a very real threat we have the responsibility of answering in being the only nation of the world capable of doing so. 2. If the US were to pull out of Vietnam, says Johnson, the tracks would be laid for a Communist takeover of the globe. Not only this, but pulling out would be turning our backs on eleven years of American policy, turning away from the messages of Eisenhower and Kennedy. 3. Both reasons for occupation, that given by President Johnson and that of President Bush, have in mind the goal of protecting the world from a virus. In one case the virus was Communism, the other terrorism.
Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. policy in Vietnam in a single sentence? What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement? He feels that the Asian countries cannot defend themselves on their on, and we must be the American country allies were used to relying on. He continues US involvement because he knows that America provides a shield against these other countries, and that we can help them.
What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam? He predicts " The battle would be renewed in one country and then another country, bringing with it perhaps even larger and crueler conflict, as we have learned from the lessons of history."
How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George W. Bushs explanation of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq? Both Presidents are getting themselves involved in other countries. We are trying to help the world's countries salvage their governments.
Yes. The main reasons are to stop any kind of domino effect from being created by our defeat and to help preserve democracy against communism in countries wishing to resist, in this case South Vietnam.
He predicts that no nation would ever have confidence in us again and that a domino effect would be created where the violence would escalate in other countries as the communists spread.
In both situations the Presidents are trying to protect the countries government from a spreading disease of evil, communism with LBJ and terrorism with GWB, and are met with resistance from the general population of the nation whod rather us be gone.
Yes. The main reasons are to stop any kind of domino effect from being created by our defeat and to help preserve democracy against communism in countries wishing to resist, in this case South Vietnam.
He predicts that no nation would ever have confidence in us again and that a domino effect would be created where the violence would escalate in other countries as the communists spread.
In both situations the Presidents are trying to protect the countries government from a spreading disease of evil, communism with LBJ and terrorism with GWB, and are met with resistance from the general population of the nation whod rather us be gone.
LOL. J/K 1. The U.S. must stop the spread of communism and protect those wishing to resist it to show our seriousness and strength to maintain other nations confidence in us.
Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. foreign policy in Vietnam in a single sentence?What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement?
The U.S. is in Vietnam to maintain American power, defend the people of South Vietnam and to stop the spread of communism throughout the Asian world.The main reasons given for continuing U.S. involvement are: that the small Asian nations cannot fight communism alone they need the help of the U.S.If we leave Vietnam we would appear weak to the rest of the world and they would loose confidence in our ability to help.Leaving would give the Communists more power and determination to continue to move ahead and take over other Asian countries and jeopardize the security of the United States.
What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam?
Johnson states that pulling out of Vietnam would only cause more aggression by the Communists.He said that history has taught us that the aggressor which in this case is the communists, would continue to battle and overthrow other countries one at a time.He also said that by leaving we would be breaking a pledge to help the Vietnamese people that was made11 years ago. A commitment that was shared by Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson. He also stated that by abandoning our commitment in South Vietnam that people of South Vietnam would be subject to terror, repression and murder.
How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George Bushs explanation of the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Bushs explanation of the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq is quite similar to the Johnson explanation relative to the U.S. involvement in Vietnam.Bush like Johnson explains that the U.S. needs to stay because the people of Iraq and Afghanistan cannot independently fight the terrorist faction in their countries and they need the protection of the U.S.He also believes that there would be mass terror, repression and murder toward the people if the U.S. were to leave these countries.Another similarity is that Bush tells us that if the U.S. were to withdraw then terrorism would spread from one country to another and that the security of the United States would be in great danger.
We must protect nations from outside influences.He wants to act as a shield against the violence and protect the image of America as a great country that can protect.
He believes that other nations would no longer be able to rely on the power and protection of the American forces because we will appear weak.
In both wars there has been a definite enemy, communist control in Vietnam defended by Johnson, and in Iraq there is the threat of terrorism as described by George W. Bush today.
1. Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. policy in Vietnam in a single sentence? What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement?
- American involvement and occupation of Vietnam is going to prevent communism from spreading all over Asia. Johnson wants to make sure America does not lose this war, especially a war against communism. Any chance of the spread of communism threatened America, and he wanted to prevent anything like that from happening.
2. What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam?
- Johnson predicted that if American forces pulled out of Vietnam that communism would spread. First communism would spread to the surrounding countries but he feared that it would eventually reach the United States.
3. How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George W. Bushs explanation of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq?
- Both Presidents used the explanation of the threat against national security as a catalyst to gain support for their wars. Additionally they were both dealing with a dictator-type leader.
1 Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. policy in Vietnam in a single sentence? What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement?
The U.S. needs to help prevent the spread of communism into Vietnam and surrounding countries. Johnson sees the U.S. as a vital guardian of all nations trying to fight communism. He feels that it is the United States duty to prevent communism from flowing into helpless little countries, such as Vietnam.
2 What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam?
Johnson predicts that if the United States pulled out of Vietnam, then it would be quickly taken over by Communism. He sees the United States as Asias only defense against Communism. He thinks they cant stand up to it by themselves.
3 How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George W. Bushs explanation of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Both Johnson and Bush feel that they are doing these countries a favor by invading them and trying to restore political stability through military force. They both feel these countries are helpless without them.
1.Can you summarize Johnsons defense of U.S. policy in Vietnam in a single sentence? What are his main reasons for continuing U.S. involvement?Johnson basically stated that we were in Vietnam to defend the valiant country from Asian communism. Our involvement is basically to help Vietnam to conquer these communist forces.2.What does Johnson predict would happen if the United States pulled out of Vietnam?Johnson said that if the US pulled out of Vietnam then communism would take over that country, then the surrounding countries, eventually crossing the seas to the United States.3.How does Johnsons explanation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam compare to George W. Bushs explanation of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq?Both Johnson and Bush feel it is necessary to help the Vietnam/Iraq restore order, by sending our troops over there we could help their governments gain power slowly and eventually rule themselves again.
