Journal Excerpts
Link # 1
http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=1291
Reading about the Kent State massacre horrifies me. If anything, the
actions taken by the Ohio National guard only hampered the progress that could
be made with the anti-war “doves”.
Violence against other persons is in no way moral, especially when it
occurs while others are practicing their Constitutional unalienable rights. The
U.S. stated that it had involved itself in the war in order to protect itself
from the violence of communism, and the threat of violence that stemmed from
“attacks” such as what occurred at the Gulf of Tonkin. They
condoned a war based on the principle of less violence against U.S. citizens,
but then perpetrated that very own offense. Where is the justice? Where is the
principle? Furthermore, I commend the students who continued to demonstrate
their pride and principles of a warless nation while being brutalized by
oppressors of the Bill of Rights. While I concede, that citizens of this nation
ought to strive for loyalty to the policies of the land, I still maintain that
any action which infringes upon their constitutional rights is immoral. Under
these circumstances, I am unsure of how I would have reacted, if I would have
been pro-war or not. Part of me thinks I would have joined the protestors, but
a greater part of me believes that I would not have. In me , a sense of
authority has been instilled within me to follow all of those in greater
positions than myself. I feel that due to this, I would have respected my
country’s decision to make war with Vietnam and support its reasons to do so.
Would I have taken issue with the Kent State massacre if I were in that time
frame? I truly believe I would have had the same amount of disgust with which I
am filled with now. The loss of
innocence and innocent lives is the most damaging course any nation, person, or
Ohio National Guard could take.
Link # 2
http://www.pbs.org/pov/regrettoinform/film_description.php
My first thought while reading this was how dreadfully ironic it was that
it was her birthday when she discovered her husband has been killed in action.
However, I feel that by doing
this documentary, Barbara
Sonneborn, only added the obstacle of needing to avoid wallowing in her pain and
anguish. There is a risk that when exposing oneself to the fears and
tribulations of the past, that one would become bogged down in sorrow and
mentally unable to function. To
simply read an excerpt of the stories of what some of these women went through
is heartbreaking and reaffirms some views I have had for a long time. I fully
believe that I will not be able to marry someone in the military. The
possibility of ever losing them to war, to the draft, or to death terrifies me
and I am aware that I am likely not strong enough to handle that worry. While I
will never say never, it has become an ingrained part of me that it is unlikely
to ever change. I would be very interested in viewing this documentary not only
to be touched by the stories, but to see the scenery of Vietnam. While one often
hears about its destruction during the war, I would enjoy seeing Vietnam in its
serene state with all of its natural beauty. It is easier to understand
devastation if one can see what is present before the storm
arrives.
Link # 3:
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/Myl_intro.html
My first instinct when
reading the article was sadness because of the fact that these atrocities were
happening, and I am still sad. However, certain other things about the article
really stuck out to me. The first was that the article almost implies the
soldiers not having education past high school helped lead to some of these
actions with its statement , “The soldiers of
Charlie Company, like most combat soldiers in Viet Nam, scored low on military
exams. Few combat soldiers had education beyond high school.” It is entirely
possible that I am being too sensitive, however, what does this article exactly
expect? During the Vietnam War, these people were drafted at incredibly young
ages in order to have men in Vietnam. In fact, the author of the Things They
Carried himself was drafted before he could even finish university, leaving him
with only a finished high school education at the time. I do wish that some of
the guilty party of soldiers who terrorized citizens were given slightly more
punishment for their actions. The fact that there was even an attempted cover up
sickens me. It is all to reminiscent of the other lies going on during the time
period, like the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and the Watergate Scandal. It is no
wonder that the United States has, albeit unfairly, earned the title of “Big
Bully” in reference to its foreign policy. The fact that Medina was able to lie
and essentially get no punishment is sickening because there is a lack of
justice for the individuals killed in the massacre.
Link # 4
http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/history/index.html
The interesting part of this article was the background information
regarding the war. In psychology it is called the hindsight bias, when one can
look back and see what they should have done and it is very applicable
here. There were many instances
where the scale of Vietnam could have been taken back if the United States had
done different actions. The Eisenhower administration really should have used
NATO in its enforcing of the Geneva Accords as opposed to SEATO in order to add
extra credibility to the proceedings.
Furthermore, Diem should never have been allowed to stay into power, the
United States ought to have disposed of him as soon as he showed tyrannical
signs. If this had been done, it is entirely possible that communism would have
never taken over North Vietnam and the war may not have happened. Even
more so, I honestly believe the United States government did not understand from
a strategic perspective how to handle this fight.
They should have either scaled back their involvement in order to ensure
the pretense of neutrality or if they truly desired the containment of
communism, they ought to have involved themselves even more. By taking a middle
man approach, and then withdrawing completely, they left the South Vietnamese
unprepared for a solo fight leading to their imminent loss.
I think the ideals that the U.S. had when trying to fight the war were
genuine, however, the countries tactics were unjustifiable and frankly
jeopardizing.
Link #
5:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/reflect/borton.html
I really enjoyed this
article due to the rareness of what it describes. The fact that a woman, who at
this time probably faced extreme discrimination, was able to put her abilities
to use in a weird predicament .
There was an overwhelming sense of suspense when reading the article,
even though I knew she must have made it out alive. I found her ingenuity when
responding to the Vietnamese woman refreshing. While I would like to believe
that I would have been able to handle the pressures of Vietnam gracefully, I
doubt I would have been able to survive in Vietnam with my limited knowledge of
the culture. What was even more
interesting was the writer’s accounts of Vietnamese spies. I have to say while
it may have been potentially damaging to the U.S., it was slightly pleasing to
hear of women gaining the upper hand and being able to use what women were
perceived as in order to receive needed information.