Richard Nixon Vietnam War Analysis

1091 Words 5 Pages
When Richard Nixon became president in 1969, he was determined to end the Vietnam war. He had a few strategies in mind to help him achieve this goal. These strategies include, implementing a policy of Vietnamization, reducing the US forces from about 500,000 to 30,000, and last force the communists to negotiate by conducting air strikes on Cambodia and Laos. The question is often asked, were these airstrikes justified? The answer to this is for the most part a matter of opinion. From March 18, 1969, to May 26, 1970, the United States launched a secret bombing campaign in Cambodia and Laos, codenamed Operation Menu. The bombing targets were areas thought to be resupply and training areas for the NLF, or National Liberation Front, and the …show more content…
He was voted into office by the American people. When he came into office he immediately began trying to do what he thought was the best thing for our country. He wanted to end the war in Vietnam. Many US citizens didn’t agree with the war and were probably very happy Nixon was trying so hard to end the war quickly. Although it is terrible that many civilians died in these bombings, I do believe that his intentions were good at the time. I do not agree, however, with the fact that he tried to keep these attacks a secret from basically everyone he could. That being said, I can, in a way, understand why he would attempt to keep it a secret. People were already angry about the war, and he didn’t want to give them yet another reason to even more angry. This also raises the question of whether or not he tried to keep these events a secret because he already knew they were not the right thing to do. I am not saying I agree with these bombings, but I do believe that they were justified. Nixon was one of the many leaders during the Vietnam war. Others included Diem, Ho Chi Minh, and Truman. People have many different opinions on these people and their ability to lead a country. The question is sometimes asked, who would have been the best leader to govern Vietnam? Diem, Ho Chi Minh, or Truman? Again, I believe that this is a matter of …show more content…
Just because one domino fell doesn 't mean it has to hit the other ones on the way down. The US should have saved its weapons, troops, and time for a country that was a real threat. Ho Chi Minh would have been, in my opinion, a fine ruler for vietnam and would been loved by many. If this is what the people of Vietnam want, they should be able to have it. The US is so afraid to let other countries be happy because they think it will destroy ours happiness. I do understand however that we cannot let countries do whatever they want, but, sometimes, we need to be able to think about more than just

Related Documents