Introduction
One of the longest wars that America has involved itself in was the Vietnam War. This war, which took place between 1959 and 1979, was a prolonged struggle between the United States and North Vietnamese nationalist forces who were trying to unite the country under a single communist government. Unlike many wars where America has emerged victorious, the nation was however defeated in this war and communism took over in Vietnam. Many Americans opposed the war and today, this war is often used as benchmark of what America ought not to do when it comes to foreign conflicts. In my efforts to gain more insight into the Vietnam War, I started looking for some literature that pertained to the war. I chose to look at several newspaper articles published in the New York Times between January and February 1963. I utilized the Clemson Library Database to search for these articles using the keyword ‘Vietnam War”.
The media also focused on matters that happened in the United States that seems to question the involvement of the US in the Vietnam. Any public figure who questioned why the government involved itself in this war was very likely to be featured in a newspaper piece. In addition, common viewpoints of people who opposed the war were carefully recorded. For instance, in one of the articles, there was a report on a senate group that had been established to find out if whether offering aid to the South Vietnamese who opposed communism was justified. In this particular article, the author called Hanson Baldwin adopts a particularly biased tone in his crusade against the Vietnam War. He questions the supposed questions how “vital” South Vietnam is to the security of the United States for the nation to actually involve itself in this war (Mansfield and U.S. Role in Vietnam). He is particularly fearful of what a defeat would mean for the self-image of the United States. He also mention the sizes of both the North Vietnamese and the American/South Vietnamese forces and mentions that the latter are in the “scales” although they remain committed politically or psychologically.
Most of the articles used the report of American casualties to drive home the point that American did not really need to involve itself in the war. In David Habelstam article, "Americans Salvage Helicopters Shot Down by Guerrillas in Vietnam” he begins by stating, “Communist guerrillas armed with automatic weapons inflicted a major defeat on United States helicopters carrying troops into an operation in the Mekong Delta. Five Helicopters were shot down”. The purpose of such a blatant article that uses words such as “automatic weapons” and “inflicted a major defeat” is to show the strength of the enemy and how this this is a war that is unwinnable. It aims to show a war that the United States does not belong in and that the troops should probably pack their bags and go home. To show the strength of the enemy further, the articles demonstrate the desperate measure that the United States has been forced to result to in its supposed fight against communism. Reports are told of the US troops taking back “excess” weapons that it had given some native tribesmen living in some central highlands to supposedly fight against communism (Tribesmen's 'Excess' Weapons are Sought by U.S. in Vietnam). The US feared that the weapons might be used for other purposes than it was originally intended for. Once again, the author of this article adopts an extremely biased tone as he attempts to show the desperation of the Unites States forces. Not only was those desperation present in Vietnam, but it was also at home, where there were also other forms of desperation and conflicts. Halbestam reports of internal conflicts and wrangling between the Army and the Air force in regards to the use of air power in the fight against the communists (Service Conflict Boils in Vietnam). The army accuses the air force of trying to play al larger part or role in the war while the Air force is extremely critical of the army’s aviation. The intention of the author here is to show the disorganization of the entire system of fighting the communists and therefore show that America does not really need to be in this war.
In conclusion, the biasness and the negative attitude adopted by the authors of these articles about the war in Vietnam are very evident. Although they did not mention it blatantly that they were against the war, their writings speak volumes of how much they opposed this war.
Works Cited
