George H.W. Bush and "kicking" the syndrome
![Picture](/uploads/9/3/2/9/9329038/4175044.jpg?1402057515)
At the end of the Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush said in his victory statement, “By God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all.” Although the conclusive victory in the Gulf War over Iraq as they invaded Kuwait did raise the nation’s confidence in foreign policy, this statement may have been premature, as this conflict didn’t even come close in comparison to the Vietnam War, and it was fought under the most favorable circumstances for the US, so you can’t say it completely made amends for the humiliation of Vietnam
(Herring, 2). Also, you can see a lot of remnants of Vietnam Syndrome in the war. One example is how they focused on aerial attacks in particular. This is due to the lesson learned in Vietnam, to not waste US lives with costly ground battles, and to apply sufficient force immediately instead of just trickling into the conflict like was done in Vietnam. Another example is how Bush made the decision not to pursue the conflict into Baghdad, which is again due to the lesson learned at Vietnam, to use force only as a last resort to accomplish objectives that can be achieved swiftly using maximum force with minimal casualties, and can be backed up with just cause. Therefore, it can be said that instead of “kicking” Vietnam
Syndrome, the Gulf war institutionalized it (Herring, 5).
(Herring, 2). Also, you can see a lot of remnants of Vietnam Syndrome in the war. One example is how they focused on aerial attacks in particular. This is due to the lesson learned in Vietnam, to not waste US lives with costly ground battles, and to apply sufficient force immediately instead of just trickling into the conflict like was done in Vietnam. Another example is how Bush made the decision not to pursue the conflict into Baghdad, which is again due to the lesson learned at Vietnam, to use force only as a last resort to accomplish objectives that can be achieved swiftly using maximum force with minimal casualties, and can be backed up with just cause. Therefore, it can be said that instead of “kicking” Vietnam
Syndrome, the Gulf war institutionalized it (Herring, 5).
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Echoes of Vietnam
Iraq
When President George Bush infamously invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming to be after WMD's, he didn't obey the criteria that his father had set when he won the Gulf War in Kuwait. These included that you should not get involved in non-crucial wars, and that you should have a clear objective when you do get involved, attacking that objective with sufficient force immediately. The war dragged on 8 years until President Obama effectively removed American troops from Iraq, leaving the country with the responsibility of their own security. The war had a lot of similarities with the Vietnam War, in that the motives for being involved in the first place were in question, and the public support of the war dropped of very substantially very quickly, even more so than Vietnam. Also, one CIA agent described those at the head of the war in the administration as dangerous to national security, and a threat to world peace as they supposedly lied and manipulated intelligence in order to further their agenda of removing Saddam. It sounds very similar to things that went on to increase support for the Vietnam War and pretend to be having success when in fact the US was not. Although the costs of the war weren't nearly as much, with 13 times less casualties, the views about it were similar (Myra, 8). Therefore, future foreign policy would also be effected, as it was after Vietnam, and President Bush's administration would forever be remembered by the humiliation of Iraq. It would now be even harder for American Presidents to get involved in foreign conflicts without facing an immense back lash from the people, and Iraq Syndrome, an extension of Vietnam Syndrome would be in affect (Myra, 3).
When President George Bush infamously invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming to be after WMD's, he didn't obey the criteria that his father had set when he won the Gulf War in Kuwait. These included that you should not get involved in non-crucial wars, and that you should have a clear objective when you do get involved, attacking that objective with sufficient force immediately. The war dragged on 8 years until President Obama effectively removed American troops from Iraq, leaving the country with the responsibility of their own security. The war had a lot of similarities with the Vietnam War, in that the motives for being involved in the first place were in question, and the public support of the war dropped of very substantially very quickly, even more so than Vietnam. Also, one CIA agent described those at the head of the war in the administration as dangerous to national security, and a threat to world peace as they supposedly lied and manipulated intelligence in order to further their agenda of removing Saddam. It sounds very similar to things that went on to increase support for the Vietnam War and pretend to be having success when in fact the US was not. Although the costs of the war weren't nearly as much, with 13 times less casualties, the views about it were similar (Myra, 8). Therefore, future foreign policy would also be effected, as it was after Vietnam, and President Bush's administration would forever be remembered by the humiliation of Iraq. It would now be even harder for American Presidents to get involved in foreign conflicts without facing an immense back lash from the people, and Iraq Syndrome, an extension of Vietnam Syndrome would be in affect (Myra, 3).
|
![Picture](/uploads/9/3/2/9/9329038/8565512.png)
Afghanistan
As the United Sates is still pulling out of Afghanistan today, the war also shows shades of Vietnam. Just like Iraq, and Vietnam, Afghanistan is being left in a very fragile state, and the US is pulling out due to tiring over war. Also, as Obama pulls out he is using targeting drones, and other special commando operations to continue the fight without using US soldiers on the ground. This is very similar to in Vietnam how the US had the Phoenix program which also targeted Viet Cong members without the use of a lot of ground fighting, and it worked temporarily, but in the end was not successful. Is that going to be the same result in Afghanistan? Maybe it will be and maybe when it finally ends it will leave the same ever-lasting effect on foreign policy that Vietnam did. It will serve as another example of why not to get involved in drawn out foreign conflicts and will only enhance the Vietnam Syndrome that George H.W. Bush claimed to have kicked (Kalb, 5).
As the United Sates is still pulling out of Afghanistan today, the war also shows shades of Vietnam. Just like Iraq, and Vietnam, Afghanistan is being left in a very fragile state, and the US is pulling out due to tiring over war. Also, as Obama pulls out he is using targeting drones, and other special commando operations to continue the fight without using US soldiers on the ground. This is very similar to in Vietnam how the US had the Phoenix program which also targeted Viet Cong members without the use of a lot of ground fighting, and it worked temporarily, but in the end was not successful. Is that going to be the same result in Afghanistan? Maybe it will be and maybe when it finally ends it will leave the same ever-lasting effect on foreign policy that Vietnam did. It will serve as another example of why not to get involved in drawn out foreign conflicts and will only enhance the Vietnam Syndrome that George H.W. Bush claimed to have kicked (Kalb, 5).
![](http://www.weebly.com/weebly/images/file_icons/pdf.png)
the_declaration_of_the_war_on_terror.pdf | |
File Size: | 25 kb |
File Type: |
Encompasses George Bush's September 20, 2001 speech proclaiming the War on Terror, with analysis of Persuasive devices.
Obama's Policy
![Picture](/uploads/9/3/2/9/9329038/5556074.jpg?286)
The effects of Vietnam can be seen today
with the current President, Barrack Obama. It is clearly evident in his
appointment of Senator John Kerry as Secretary of State, and his appointment of
former Senator Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. What both of these men have in common is that they are loyal to the President, and they are both decorated Vietnam veterans that are scarred physically and psychologically from the war (Kalb,1). Due to this fact, it can be implied that they will be very much against entanglement in non-essential wars, since they’ve experienced the brutality of it first-hand.
When Kerry returned the US after serving as a naval officer, he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971 demanding an “immediate withdrawal” of all forces from Vietnam, saying, “How
do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?” He quickly rose to
national prominence as an anti-war veteran, and remains that way to this day,
being especially against wars that aren’t necessary to US security
(Kalb, 2).
Hagel was in the army during the Vietnam War, and as he was being medevac’d out after suffering from wounds, he turned to an aide and said, “If I ever get out of this, and I’m ever in a position to influence policy, I will do everything I can
to avoid needless, senseless war.” The Vietnam War clearly impacted Hagel’s opinion on foreign policy (Kalb, 2).
Now that they both have the power to influence Foreign Policy, they will, by advocating a moderate line in places like Iran, Afghanistan, and other turbulent Arab countries. Due to their pasts with Vietnam they will continue to push non-military solutions across the globe (Kalb, 4). Yes it is true that President Obama has the ultimate power in making decisions like that, but he now has two anti-war advisors at his side on top of his history of being strongly against non-crucial wars, as the man that won the presidency by promising to pull the troops out of Iraq. As you can see, Vietnam Syndrome has made its complete return to United States foreign policy, if you believe that it ever even left in the first place.
with the current President, Barrack Obama. It is clearly evident in his
appointment of Senator John Kerry as Secretary of State, and his appointment of
former Senator Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. What both of these men have in common is that they are loyal to the President, and they are both decorated Vietnam veterans that are scarred physically and psychologically from the war (Kalb,1). Due to this fact, it can be implied that they will be very much against entanglement in non-essential wars, since they’ve experienced the brutality of it first-hand.
When Kerry returned the US after serving as a naval officer, he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971 demanding an “immediate withdrawal” of all forces from Vietnam, saying, “How
do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?” He quickly rose to
national prominence as an anti-war veteran, and remains that way to this day,
being especially against wars that aren’t necessary to US security
(Kalb, 2).
Hagel was in the army during the Vietnam War, and as he was being medevac’d out after suffering from wounds, he turned to an aide and said, “If I ever get out of this, and I’m ever in a position to influence policy, I will do everything I can
to avoid needless, senseless war.” The Vietnam War clearly impacted Hagel’s opinion on foreign policy (Kalb, 2).
Now that they both have the power to influence Foreign Policy, they will, by advocating a moderate line in places like Iran, Afghanistan, and other turbulent Arab countries. Due to their pasts with Vietnam they will continue to push non-military solutions across the globe (Kalb, 4). Yes it is true that President Obama has the ultimate power in making decisions like that, but he now has two anti-war advisors at his side on top of his history of being strongly against non-crucial wars, as the man that won the presidency by promising to pull the troops out of Iraq. As you can see, Vietnam Syndrome has made its complete return to United States foreign policy, if you believe that it ever even left in the first place.
The Syndrome Continues Today in Syria
![Picture](/uploads/9/3/2/9/9329038/4892805.jpg?389)
In the wake of the other Middle Eastern wars, Vietnam Syndrome, along with the lessons of Iraq, has come back to haunt United States foreign policy today in Syria. Due the US's failure in its previous conflicts, the country now faces friends in the Middle East that doubt the country's competence, and a people weary of entanglement in a conflict that could turn out like Vietnam or Iraq. Going forward it will interesting to see if this sentiment will control foreign policy with the situation in Syria, and it may prevent the US from acting when it really should (Snepp, 2). As of now, the US looks like the only viable candidate that is capable of responding effectively to Assad's use of chemical weapons, but with no backing from it's allies or from the "war-tired" people, it doesn't seem like a good idea for the US to get involved. This isn't referring to a full scale war, simply to deterrence, or targeting regime assets in order to stop them from continuing what they are currently doing (Myra, 3). The Obama administration is trying to gain support of intervening but is doing so with quite a bit of opposition,
"We are the country that has tried, not always successfully, but always tried to
honor a set of universal values around which we have organized our lives and our
aspirations. This crime against conscience, this crime against humanity, this
crime against the most fundamental principles of international community,
against the norm of the international community—this matters to us, and it
matters to who we are. And it matters to leadership and to our credibility in
the world." - Secretary of State John Kerry
Even Today, the impact of Vietnam is very real and lasting.
"We are the country that has tried, not always successfully, but always tried to
honor a set of universal values around which we have organized our lives and our
aspirations. This crime against conscience, this crime against humanity, this
crime against the most fundamental principles of international community,
against the norm of the international community—this matters to us, and it
matters to who we are. And it matters to leadership and to our credibility in
the world." - Secretary of State John Kerry
Even Today, the impact of Vietnam is very real and lasting.
Conclusion
No matter what the justification behind the still ever present syndrome today, the sacrifice upon those called to serve is still there nonetheless. Though this sacrifice may be limited in future use due to as iterated above, current Vietnam -like events in recent history. Though the nation may just need the right kind of Doctor, such like Reagan, to mend the nation's still healing wounds. Though nonetheless no matter what political ideology is embedded, we as Americans should finally welcome home out veterans no matter if you believe in the morals of involvement or not, because only as a nation shall we move forward and finally kick the Vietnam Syndrome.