How is the Vietnam War taught in the U.S?

[Canid117]

snip

Our goal was to prevent North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We failed to achieve our goal and so we lost the war. You can win every battle and still lose the war. For an example look at... well... Vietnam.

 

[AngryFrenchCanadian]

So for the Vietnam war...thank the french.

But how is it taught? Oddly, teachers here magically twist it to just be all our fault and never mention the french.

They mentioned that in our class, but from what I understood, the American government was eager to oblige to their request.

At the time, wasn't there any excuse the American government wouldn't take to prevent communism from "spreading"?

 

[commodore96]

In short we focus more on the bad in our country than the good.

Perhaps there's been more bad than good?

Still, I'd be interested in learning where you went to school. Most schools are quite the opposite in general. They teach "America Good, World Bad".

Just some public school in Western New York.

I believe though there has been more good than bad because lots of countries have benefitted and still do benefit from the United State's involvement in global affairs. For every Pleasy vs. Ferguson there is a Bakke vs California, for every bomb dropped on Japan their was a huge contribution to rebuilding it post war, for every Indian tribe moved a nice tax free casino is created, for every blind eye turned towards Darfur their is billions going to other African Countries, etc. Even though it is not always even in all parts of the world the United States gives back as well.

 

[Zay-el]

snip

Are you serious? No, really, that is ALL they've taught you in high school history classes? I...I cannot believe that. I have no idea how teaching history goes in the USA, but this is just...wow...I didn't think such a curriculum was even possible.

Personally, my high school history education covered, amongst some I might have left out: prehistoric history, Sumer, Mesopotamia, early Middle East, Egypt, Greece, Rome, early Europe, our country's history(which, depending on how you view it starts from 780ish, or 1000), the history of just about every major(and some minor) European countries, Russia, China, Japan, colonial territories, UK, USA, major battles/revolutions/formations in Europe, WWI, WWII, Cold War, USSR and a load of other stuff I won't list because I don't wanna clutter up this reply any more.

Incidentally, most of these we already learn pre-high school, so it's more or less partially a revision. A friend of mine mentioned the history curriculum is bad, but I didn't this it was really this bad.

 

[Shy_Guy]

for every Indian tribe moved a nice tax free casino is created

At this point, I realized you must obviously be joking. Not a very tasteful joke, sir.

 

[GestaltEsper]

I think it was something like "We pushed too far, pissed China off and got our asses beat."

 

[Lionsfan]

snip

Our goal was to prevent North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We failed to achieve our goal and so we lost the war. You can win every battle and still lose the war. For an example look at... well... Vietnam.

But the facts don't lie. When the US withdrew we had achieved out goal. We had prevented North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We had set up a peace treaty and that was the end of that. We withdrew and went home, having achieved our goal from a tactical standpoint. It was only after we left the North Vietnamese broke the Peace Treaty and was able to win

 

[Shy_Guy]

But the facts don't lie. When the US withdrew we had achieved out goal. We had prevented North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We had set up a peace treaty and that was the end of that. We withdrew and went home, having achieved our goal from a tactical standpoint. It was only after we left the North Vietnamese broke the Peace Treaty and was able to win

So, the U.S. delayed North Vietnam? Wow,that's totally worth all the deaths and destruction and money. It's even worth all the kids dying till today from undetonated bombs. Cleary we won!

 

[Smagmuck_]

I was tought it wasn't so much a war as it was a police action... Other then that we watched "We Were Soldiers"...

 

[Stephen Wo]

I'm really the only one in all six of my classes who knows much about it. Personally, it wasn't noble. We were really going for the Soviet Union by proxy there. It's one of those rough spots we prefer to shy away from.

 

[Grospoliner]

Unfortunately the majority of modern history is skipped. Between pre-history, the neolithic, bronze, iron, and industrial ages, coupled with the short American school year. We virtually never even touch on 1900-Modern history. Even in basic college courses it is rarely touched on.

Fortunately we have ample opportunities for post-education learning when it comes to this. Between History, History International, The Military Channel, PBS, and others I don't get, the frequency of modern historical programs are quite high. The majority of these programs are presented as objectively as possible.

So the only American's under the impression that we didn't lose horribly in Viet Nam through a mixture of poor policy and strategic execution are the historical revisionists present in any country. Even worse is the treatment Viet Nam vets received from the public thanks to anti-war propaganda and cultural revolution.

 

[Lionsfan]

But the facts don't lie. When the US withdrew we had achieved out goal. We had prevented North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We had set up a peace treaty and that was the end of that. We withdrew and went home, having achieved our goal from a tactical standpoint. It was only after we left the North Vietnamese broke the Peace Treaty and was able to win

So, the U.S. delayed North Vietnam? Wow,that's totally worth all the deaths and destruction and money. It's even worth all the kids dying till today from undetonated bombs. Cleary we won!

I already said I'm not going to argue ethical violations. There's no doubt that we really should have told the French to shove off when they first asked us for help, and there's no doubt that The Gulf of Tonkin was staged.

I'm not arguing that, I'm saying that from a purely tactical POV the US won the Vietnam War, which is something that often get lost in the shuffle when discussing it

 

[Grospoliner]

I was tought it wasn't so much a war as it was a police action... Other then that we watched "We Were Soldiers"...

"Policing action" is one of those fancy terms that revisionists like to use to try to save face. When you lose nearly 60k soldiers fighting in a country that small, it is a full scale war.

 

[WorldCritic]

In my school anyway in my Junior year my teacher actually explained the U.S. involvment in the war with surprising detail that can more or less be summed up with "We went to Vietnam, things went to hell, and now no one likes to talk about it." So bascially my teacher at least wasn't afraid to talk about the things America fucked up.

 

[Averant]

it's not taught all that much, since it was a left over war from the French. Asked us to come in right about they time they left completely.


And it seems everyone loves to ignore that little fact...

here is a snippet

The basic answer is that the U.S. was asked by France, via NATO, to keep the communists from "taking over" the French Territory. We sent troops over only to advise, and from there WE were in it and it just went "to hell in a handbasket" to quote a friend of mine. We left over 58,000 Brothers and Sisters there.

Hope this helps, if not, check your local veterans, VFW,or American Legion Halls and ask really nice, you may find out more.


Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_the_Vietnam_War_start#ixzz1NrXrkO3q


So first get the dirty handed nasty US soldier idea out of your minds. Wars are not won by fighting fair, or limiting your targets. They are won by doing what needs to be done. The NVC used the Geneva convention just like Muslim fighters do today.

Hide supplies in villages, threatening the civilians.
Hide weapons in churches, schools, and other targets off limits

And surround said targets with civilians so if they are attacked they get heart sting tugs from their own and make the enemy look bad in public light...


So for the Vietnam war...thank the french.

But how is it taught? Oddly, teachers here magically twist it to just be all our fault and never mention the french.

The French? Nobody ever mentioned the french in my class. The reason I was taught was that it was part of the Containment policy, keeping Communism restricted to the east. Far as I know, the french didn't even KNOW about the damn place.

OT: Mainly what we learned was general, the gov't at the time, the policies, and an kind of thorough overview (oxymoron?) about how it went down over there. I have NEVER heard about the Search and Destroy policy, though I do know that the American troops used Napalm and Agent Orange (herbicide thingy) to completely fuck up the forests that the Vietnamese were hiding in. Maybe that SnD was part of it?

Captcha: Not Lvithro

Not Lvithro? Then who?

EDIT: Looking at all the answers, the french probably DID know about the damn place. I just don't remember anything said about it. Maybe something in my textbook, but I don't have it anymore.

 

[McFarlington]

we really only go the WWII then while covering the Cold War they say that we lost in the Vietnam War.

 

[The Epicosity]

They talk about it a bit, like how much of a screw up it was and things like that, but they don't talk about it too much.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Most public school history classes don't ever tend to reach the Vietnam war. Heck, my US History II class barely touched it after spending 2 months on WWII and the Holocaust. The Advanced Placement classes tend to go all the way up to the Clinton Administration from what I've heard and even they don't tend to paint the most favorable light for the US.

 

[o_d]

snip

Our goal was to prevent North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We failed to achieve our goal and so we lost the war. You can win every battle and still lose the war. For an example look at... well... Vietnam.

But the facts don't lie. When the US withdrew we had achieved out goal. We had prevented North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. We had set up a peace treaty and that was the end of that. We withdrew and went home, having achieved our goal from a tactical standpoint. It was only after we left the North Vietnamese broke the Peace Treaty and was able to win

I don't think that counts as "winning" the Vietnam War though. It sounds more like putting a bandage on a wound that needs stitches and saying it's stopped the bleeding and you can go home.

 

[the_nampir]

In my high school there is a history elective called "Understanding the 60s" and as the name would imply, Vietnam is covered a lot in it. There is no attempt to sugar coat it and make it seem like the US was right in getting involved.