Fuel to the Fire: A Comparison Between the Use of Napalm in Vietnam to Terrorism
Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. In the world today, Isis is the largest and most prominent example of terrorism. A big part of how Isis intimidates is by creating high-production quality that display their ruthlessness with violence as well as their resources at hand (BBC). Also Isis has a clear political aim that involves “enforcing their view of conservative Islamic traditions” (BBC). Comparing modern terrorism, such as Isis, to the use of napalm by the US in the Vietnam war is a little obscure and does not come with concrete similarities as a result of a 50 year time gap. But, when looking at the basics of …show more content…
Instead, it was more that the disadvantages piled up against the US, and they weren’t left with many options. Two large disadvantages included uncharted territory and unclear enemies. Uncharted territories were very difficult to fight because of the vast jungles. Also it was very hard for American soldiers to tell the difference between enemies and civilians in the war. Because of these disadvantages, the search and destroy had to be created and implemented. This strategy involved searching out as much communists troops as possible, destroying them, and then basically retreating to known safe land (History). James Anderson, a US veteran of the the Vietnam described search and destroy as “body count being the measure of success” (History). This measure comes from the end goal to where so many communists troops have been killed, that they surrender the fight. That ideology is where napalm starts to seem like a reliable tool for the US to utilize. Napalm could cover a large are, acquired many victims, and tear through the jungle that the Viet Cong used so well to their advantage (History). On paper napalm seems very beneficial to the advancement of this strategy and specifically to the cause in Vietnam, but to put it on paper is to negate its inhumanity and radical …show more content…
Napalm is a long-burning substance comprised of gasoline and many other chemicals that can reach up 2000 degrees fahrenheit (US History). When released by air force it can cause a wind current where wind feeds into the fire and can reach speeds of 70 miles per hour (US History). Although the large statistics appear to be quite terrifying, they pale in comparison to what napalm does to the individual affected by it, which is where it’s true fear and inhumanness originates. Napalm uses “Polystyrene and other polymers as a thickening agent,” which makes the substance to be more like a jelly than a liquid (US History). This causes the fire to stick on the victims and be not easily distinguishable which makes for a very slow and torturous death (JStor). The lasting effects of napalm are so severe that on a Vietnamese account: “It was better to die from napalm then to survive it” (JStor). Napalm definitely constitutes as a weapon of fear in that the Vietnamese would rather die than to experience it. That shows a difference between fighting for a cause and terrorism. Napalm was undoubtedly useful for the US’s strategy and cause, but it’s terrorism to use it instill fear because of it’s dreadful
Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. In the world today, Isis is the largest and most prominent example of terrorism. A big part of how Isis intimidates is by creating high-production quality that display their ruthlessness with violence as well as their resources at hand (BBC). Also Isis has a clear political aim that involves “enforcing their view of conservative Islamic traditions” (BBC). Comparing modern terrorism, such as Isis, to the use of napalm by the US in the Vietnam war is a little obscure and does not come with concrete similarities as a result of a 50 year time gap. But, when looking at the basics of …show more content…
Instead, it was more that the disadvantages piled up against the US, and they weren’t left with many options. Two large disadvantages included uncharted territory and unclear enemies. Uncharted territories were very difficult to fight because of the vast jungles. Also it was very hard for American soldiers to tell the difference between enemies and civilians in the war. Because of these disadvantages, the search and destroy had to be created and implemented. This strategy involved searching out as much communists troops as possible, destroying them, and then basically retreating to known safe land (History). James Anderson, a US veteran of the the Vietnam described search and destroy as “body count being the measure of success” (History). This measure comes from the end goal to where so many communists troops have been killed, that they surrender the fight. That ideology is where napalm starts to seem like a reliable tool for the US to utilize. Napalm could cover a large are, acquired many victims, and tear through the jungle that the Viet Cong used so well to their advantage (History). On paper napalm seems very beneficial to the advancement of this strategy and specifically to the cause in Vietnam, but to put it on paper is to negate its inhumanity and radical …show more content…
Napalm is a long-burning substance comprised of gasoline and many other chemicals that can reach up 2000 degrees fahrenheit (US History). When released by air force it can cause a wind current where wind feeds into the fire and can reach speeds of 70 miles per hour (US History). Although the large statistics appear to be quite terrifying, they pale in comparison to what napalm does to the individual affected by it, which is where it’s true fear and inhumanness originates. Napalm uses “Polystyrene and other polymers as a thickening agent,” which makes the substance to be more like a jelly than a liquid (US History). This causes the fire to stick on the victims and be not easily distinguishable which makes for a very slow and torturous death (JStor). The lasting effects of napalm are so severe that on a Vietnamese account: “It was better to die from napalm then to survive it” (JStor). Napalm definitely constitutes as a weapon of fear in that the Vietnamese would rather die than to experience it. That shows a difference between fighting for a cause and terrorism. Napalm was undoubtedly useful for the US’s strategy and cause, but it’s terrorism to use it instill fear because of it’s dreadful