Vietnam Course Work - Vinciguerra
Vietnam Course Work - Vinciguerra
Vietnam Course Work - Vinciguerra
Neil Sheehan’s ‘A Bright Shining Lie’ offers a many-sided research of the Vietnam War, with Chapter
6 presenting a very sad moment in the narrative. This chapter serves as what seems to be a critical
juncture in the book by underscoring the tragic consequences of American involvement in the
Vietnam war. One of the primary reasons for America’s failure in Vietnam, as unravelled by Sheehan,
is the downward spiral of public support for the war. Sheehan’s argument is marked not only by his
extensive research but also by his own background and his experiences. Sheehan, a career journalist
and war correspondent, had a firsthand view of the Vietnam War, which without a doubt influenced
his own perspective. His deep knowledge of the conflict allows readers to gain valuable insights into
the war’s complexities. The downwards spiral of public support for the war, as seen by Sheehan, can
be seen in President Lyndon B. Johnson’s famous remark during the height of anti-war protests: “I
don’t think that there’s any doubt that if I were running for re-election, I’d be running last 1” This
statement encapsulates the growing discontent among the American people, who’s discontent was
in constant increase, who increasingly questioned the wisdom of their nation’s involvement in
Vietnam. Sheehan’s use of Johnson’s direct words adds authenticity to his narrative, allowing
readers to grasp the extent of the public’s disillusionment in their President. Moreover, ‘A Bright
Shining Lie’ underscores the challenges that the USA military had to face such as the unfamiliar
terrain as well as the guerilla warfare tactics employed by the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong
forces. Sheehan describes the clear contrast between the dense jungles and complex tunnel
networks present in Vietnam, where unconventional warfare prevailed, and the conventional
strategies used by the United States were obsolete in Vietnam. He writes “They encountered booby-
trapped trails, clumps of bamboo concealing punji stakes, and ingenious camouflage. The little
people used the forest itself as an ally, transforming it into a dense, dark jungle that confounded the
enemy.”2 This passage from the text underscores the difficulties the United States faced when trying
to adapt to this unconventional style of gorilla warfare. Lewis Sorley’s ‘Better War’ supplies more
insight into the US struggle in Vietnam. Sorley’s argument, like Sheehan’s reflects his background
and perspective. Sorley, a military historian with a background in the US Army, offers an unseen
viewpoint influenced by his years of combat experience. His argument on the flawed American
tactics aligns with Sheehan’s portrayal of Lieutenant Colonel John Paul Vann’s frustration with their
1
2
countries failure to adapt to the realities in Vietnam. Sorley writes, “The American military approach
to Vietnam was fundamentally flawed. It misunderstood the nature of the enemy and the political
and military conditions necessary for victory.3” This quote pinpoints the relevance of Sorley’s
perspective as a military historian, while focusing the criteria of understanding military tactics and
conditions which would come to affect the outcome of the war. This quote also highlights the
relevance of Sorley’s perspective as a military historian, the American war strategy had for a long
time been on confrontational head on assaults and strategy, the tactics used by the Viet Cong and
North Vietnamese forces were completely different rarely ever taking this head on approach and
instead deciding to focus more on tactical surprise assault gorilla warfare, this singularly different
approach to battle was one of they key factors which resulted in American loss during the war and a
reason why Sorley’s inference in my opinion really spells out why the Viet Cong and North
Vietnamese forces seemed to win nearly all engagements. Ashley Ekins’ ‘A Winnable War’ shows a
perspective on the early stages of the conflict, suggesting that there was a window of opportunity
for success in the Vietnam War. Ekins’ argument, mainly influenced by his long career as a historian,
complements the narrative created by Sheehan’s narrative by highlighting the missed opportunities
for more effective tactics. Ekins argues,” There was a moment when the United States could have
prevailed in Vietnam, but it required a different approach.” This quote clearly underscore the
relevance of Ekins’ historical analysis, addressing the criteria of assessing the potential for different
strategies. H.R. McMaster’s “Dereliction of Duty” sheds light on the lack of honesty in the highest
levels of the hierarchal structure of the US Government during the critical period of April to June
1965. McMaster’s background as a historian and military officer allows him to assess the historical
context very effectively. His argument aligns with Sheehan’s potryal of the war as one plagued by
miscommunication and a lack of honest assessment on active military situations. McMaster writes,
“The truth was suppressed, and the consequences of that suppression were profound.” This quote
highlights the relevance of McMaster’s historical assessment, addressing the criteria of examining
the government’s decision-making process. ‘Fire in the Lake’ by Frances Fitzgeral offers a broader
perspective on the Vietnam War, focusing on the cultural and societal aspects of the conflict.
Fitzgerald’s argument is influenced by her background as a journalist and author with her interest in
Southeast Asia. Her exploration of the Vietnamese perspective deepens our understanding of the
challenges faced by the United States within Vietnam. Fitzgerald comments, “ The war did not create
these problems; it only illuminated them.” This quote underscores the relevance of her cultural
studies, addressing the criteria of considering the broader issues within American society which
affected the war. Nick Turse’s ‘Kill Anything that Moves’ introduces the darker side of the war,
emphasizing the atrocities committed by the US forces. Turse’s background as an investigastive
journalist informs his argunment. The vaildity of his argument is also cleraly evident in the extensive
research and documentation of the treatment of the Vietnamese civilians. Turse writes his
introduction. “This is a book about what happened to ordinary Vietnamese people during the
American War in Vietnam.” This quote highlights the relevance of Turse’s investigative work,
addressing the criteria of examining the ethical concerns surrounding the war.