On January 16th, 1991, President George H. W. Bush publicly announced in the Address to the Nation the United States’ participation in the Gulf War. The Gulf War arose when Iraq accused Kuwait—rich in oil—of keeping the price of crude oil low, demanding it to forgive its thirty billion dollar debt in compensation for the acclaimed conspiracy (Smitha, n.d.). In this announcement, President Bush stated the United States’ just intentions for participating, and its goals. President Bush affirmed that other means to make Iraq leave Kuwait had been tried, but were unsuccessful. Thus, the US’s goal in this engagement was “…to drive [Iraq] from Kuwait by force.” Since the United States sought to fight an injustice: Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait for unbacked accusations, and pressures to forgive a debt, the Jus Ad Bellum theory would approve the United States’ participation in this
The Vietnam War was the first war to be televised and revealed what was truly happening in Vietnam. Also, newspapers revealed stories and government secrets that proved that the American people were being lied to ( New York Times vs. the United States). The Vietnam war is believed by some to be a war deeply rooted in economics. Many aspects of the United States were affected directly. The Great Society programs were suffering because the money that was put towards the war, could have been used to help poverty programs.
The American’s setback in Vietnam War is already tattooed in their history. It triggered shameful criticism both to General William Westmoreland and the US government. Even today, many Americans still ask whether the American effort in Vietnam was a sin, a blunder, an indispensable war, a noble cause, or an idealistic campaign (History Learning Site, 2015). Instrumental to this campaign was American General William C. Westmoreland who engineered the build-up and consolidation of U.S. military forces in South Vietnam. He is considered to be the primary reason why he was not able to win the war in Vietnam as he overestimated the American people’s patience and tolerance of friendly losses.
Contextualization and introduction The Vietnam War served as a major turning point of the Cold War, during which the American public split in its support of the conflict. As a proxy in the superpower conflict between the United States (US) and the Soviet Union (USSR), the US entered to support the South Vietnamese who were at war against the communist North. To support the South and its Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), the United States sent military advisory, conducted airstrikes, and committed ground forces with the hope of curbing the growth of communist ideology in the Asian sphere of influence through a communist defeat. However, the American military ultimately did not apply full force against the Northern combatants under the People’s Army of Vietnam (PAVN/NVA) and Viet Cong (VC). Despite investing considerable quantities of human and material resources to support the South’s fight over control of Vietnam, the focus often diverted to concurrent threats such as West Germany.
Checkel (1997) also devotes significant attention to how Soviet political institutions shaped Gorbachev’s access to new policy ideas and his ability to implement them. Mendelson (1993) draws similar conclusions about the role of failure, in particular the failure of the war in Afghanistan, in promoting wide-ranging policy change. Britain and Sweden in the 20th century demonstrates that decision makers in each country responded to negative national experiences when developing new policies (Heclo,
This was until the Communist of Russia supplied and trained the Vietnam Army to a more modern fighting force. During World War II, the Vietnam army had struggled against the Japanese empire. As it was demolished along with the government of Vietnam. Following the end of the Second World War, Vietnam had adopted the Russian take of government and army with the raise of Ho Chi Minh. The official Vietnamese military was born on December 1944, and currently is consisted of Ground Forces, Navy, Air Force, Border Defense and a Coast Guard.
Can an antiquated lens provide an adequate examination and understanding of modern warfare? The theories of Carl von Clausewitz retain remarkable contemporary merit and relevance in explaining the critical elements affecting warfare in the modern era. Carl von Clausewitz’s theories of war endeavor to be comprehendible, comprehensive, and strategic. Clausewitz contends that the conduct of war itself is without doubt very difficult. But the difficulty is not that erudition and great genius are necessary to understand the basic principles of warfare.1 Clausewitz 's 1812 essay, the Principles of War, offers military commanders, with little campaign experience, a comprehendible, comprehensive, and strategic model for attaining victory in battle.
The Indian victory against Pakistan in 1971 was one of the greatest examples of operational art and the largest combined arms operation after World War 2. It was a masterpiece of Political objective, Strategic vision, operational planning and tactical execution. It is important to understand why it was seen as such a great victory. Warfare is usually divided into Positional attrition warfare (think World War 1, Iran-Iraq war or even the India-China war / India-Pakistan war of 1965) or maneuver driven situational warfare. The concept of maneuver warfare was propounded (at around the same time) by various European warfare experts, B.H.Liddel Hart (England) and Mikail Tucahavesky (shot dead by Stalin, and one of THE finest military minds the
The Vietnam War had a crucial impact on the Vietnamese and the Americans’ Home life. Not only did it have an impact on these people but also the impact on the American fighters. Between 1963 and 19 73 the US had sent thousands upon thousands of soldiers to the battle grounds in Vietnam. At the start of the war the American soldiers were fixed on the reasons they were fighting however towards 19 68 the troops were considering the real reasons’ they were involved in the war, due to this 500’000 troops had deserted the war and refused to fight. The fact that these soldiers weren’t volunteered to go and were given slips, didn’t help either.
The French colonized Vietnam because of their interests in land and labour. Vietnam is a very fertile country, so they needed Vietnam to make profit. The French rule was not favored by the Vietnamese because they did not want to be colonized and it was nothing short of cruelty. Vietnam was also occupied by the Japanese in 1940 until 1945 when France had to leave some parts of Vietnam during the second World War. 3.