After the war was over, it became the first real loss for the United States despite excellent military performance and almost 100% tactical victory. It also helped take the wind out of the Hippy/Peace Movement, which makes sense as it was largely started to counter the war in Vietnam and helped to bring Americans closer together by removing one of the great obstacle which had divided them. It also ushered in a new era of American caution with regards to the deployment of US Military forces, which America did not overcome until after several successful campaigns, in particular the First Persian Gulf War.
For Vietnam, it finally meant unity for an independent Vietnam, even if it was under a brutal communist Dictatorship. Many people who had resisted the North were sent to "reeducation" camps and were brutally tortured, brainwashed, and sometimes killed; however, Vietnam has been moving forward ever since the war's end in its development, albeit slowly. Now Vietnam is actually trying to engage the US again, but this time as an economic partner instead of a military enemy.
In terms of the war against communism, Vietnam was an indecisive battle. Communism had not been prevented from overtaking Vietnam, but the Vietnamese were so exhausted by almost 30 years of neverending conflict that any Vietnamese Communist ambitions in the rest of Southeastern Asia--if there were any--had to be shelved. While Vietnam did serve as a blight on the US's record for some time, the Soviets eventually had their own Vietnam-like catastrophe in Afghanistan. Like the US, the Soviets dominated tactically, but strategically were unable to accomplish their goals of supporting the actually fairly weak Communist Party in Afghanistan. Both wars combined demonstrated to the world that direct military involvement is not always a feasible solution.
Because the US used the military strategy of fighting a "limited" war, it lost. Heavy casualties over many years caused President Nixon to agree to peace talks.
That's really the million-dollar question isn't it. Many people are still arguing what it was about Vietnam that made it so important, or even if it was important at all! Vietnam was the natural implementation of US foreign policy with regards to communism since the NSC Directtive 68 delivered to President Truman in 1950. The Directive basically said four things: 1) Communism (as usually embodied by the Soviet Union) would always seek to expand itself and destroy free societies to secure its own power base; 2) that US policies at the time (the Marshall Plan, supporting anti-Communist regimes, and keeping military forces stationed throughout the globe in hot-zones to monitor Soviet activity, etc.) should be maintained; 3) a massive buildup in military power of the US was necessary, which would essentially constitute a large standing army even in peacetime (something the US had never had before); and 4) to be honest I forget what the fourth point was (it's been two years since I was in that class, so please forgive me!), but it basically dealt with again this question of containment of the Soviet Union/communism and possible mechanisms the US could employ to do so. For the first half of the Cold War this policy generally worked pretty well. Greece, Iran, several different Latin American countries, and to a lesser-extent Korea had all been kept communist free and Soviet forces had always backed down when it appeared the US was actually willing to fight. The problem in this theory was the belief that communism was one international and united force, so when any communist insurgency broke out anywhere in the world, it meant that it HAD to be started by and even led by the Soviet Union, which was not always the case. To be sure, the Soviets tried just as actively as the US to find supportive regimes or organisations in the 3rd World, but often, these communist movements started on their own and were locally supported. Such was the case in Vietnam. Another dangerous policy at the time was the belief in the infamous Domino Theory, which stated that if one country in a region went communist, the others would quickly follow. This is a theory that, while it has never been officially disproven (after all, no one knows what would have happened had the US never gone to Vietnam), is usually disregarded nowadays as paranoia. Just because one country becomes communist, it was no guarantee that the others would follow suite. Another inherent flaw with this belief was that it assumed that all peoples in a region were similar enough that they would all take exactly the same course of action; that communism would be exactly the same wherever it was found, and that local circumstances/culture/history/geography either had no bearing or were negligable. In terms of our strategic values, and for the sake of this argument let us assume that the Domino Theory was correct, the US needed to maintain a strong presence in Asia to combat the forces of both Soviet superpowers: China and Russia. Were they allowed to run amok, they could seriously threaten the US' strategic allies, Japan, Australia, Taiwan, and New Zealand whom we'd promised to help defend. After the Korean War, South Korea joined the sphere of American protection. Furthermore, were Southeast Asia to fall to communism, this would create the risk of India, the world's second most populated nation and a potential economic giant, also turning communist. Tropical products and indeed any Natural Resources located in these regions would be denied to US markets, and with India also going communist, the communists would have just opened up a back door to the Middle East and its oil reserves. Going south, Indonesia, Singapore, and Myanmar all might fall, giving the communists a powerful stranglehold over the Indian Ocean. If you believed the Domino Theory, then the war in Vietnam had to be won. If you didn't however, the war was basically pointless. Vietnam had little strategic value for us, no important natural resources (or at least none we couldn't get from some other country), and no capabilities to threaten Japan, Australia, Taiwan, or really any other country outside of its own immediate political sphere, and even then it would have enormous difficulties considering the massive strain almost 50 years of never ceasing war had taken on the country and her people. Which answer you choose to accept is up to you, as both could be argued. Even amongst veterans I here different things (and I mean combat veterans, guys who got shot at and lost buddies on a regular basis). Some say they're glad they went, that they believe they saved Southeast Asia and accomplished their mission (or would have accomplished their mission had they been given permission to do so), and that the war was just. Others say it was a nightmare, that they regret going, and believe it to have been pointless. As for the Vietnamese themselves, I have no idea as I've never been to Vietnam nor ever met any Vietnamese people. Really, it's up to you to find out more about it and make your own decision.
It was the only war we had (quote from the field in South Vietnam).
The Vietnam War as you probably know is a war between the U.S and Vietnam vs. Japan. It started in 1954 and ended in 1975It started in 1954(the same year the Algerian War for Independence from France began) and ended in 1975 and went on longer in Vietnam until the North Vietnamese took over South Vietnam and made the entire country communist governed. The Vietnamese had been fighting for a lot longer than before the United States stepped in to help.
1. If one could think about direct army involvement then it would be Oct. 27, 1932 US. establishes the Military Assistance Advisory Group, Indochina (MAAG) in Saigon to aid the French military (the French had been fighting communist rebels in Vietnam, their pre-WWII colony, since 1945ad).
2. If one could think about direct combat engagement then it would be November 1, 1955 -- The US. re designates MACG, Indochina, as MACG, Vietnam to specify its new direct combat advisory role with the North Vietnamese Army. The US. essentially took over the advisory role from the French, who were leaving Vietnam after their defeat at Diem Bi en Po in 1954. The Department of Defense views this date as the latest qualifying date for inclusion on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. In fact this allows US military personnel to use live weapon in Vietnam aka 'to win'!
3. March 1959 -- Ho Cha Minh declares a People's War to unite all of Vietnam under his leadership. His Politburo orders a changeover to an all-out military struggle. From the communist perspective, the "Vietnam War" against the US. has now officially started.
4. December 11, 1961 -- US. aircraft carrier "Core" arrives in Saigon with 65 helicopters and 4000 air and ground crewmen assigned to operate them for the North Vietnamese Army. Also, US. pilots start to train & fly support missions with the North Vietnamese Air Force. This really marks the first larger scale participation of US. military "advisers.
5. August 7, 1964 -- In response to the incidents involving US naval vessels USS. Maddox and the USS. Turner Joy, the US. Congress overwhelmingly passes the "Gulf of Ton-kin Resolution," allowing the President "to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force" to prevent further attacks against US. forces. Many people view this as the "official" start of the war, although there was never a declaration of war.
6. March 8, 1965 -- The first US. combat troops arrive in Vietnam, as 3500 Marines land at China Beach to defend the American air base at Da Nang. They join 23,000 American military advisers already in Vietnam. The arrival of combat troops is considered by some the start of the war, although American military advisers have been in Vietnam for over 10 years
The importance of the Vietnam War is struggle between nationalist forces attempting to join the country of Vietnam under a communist government and the United States with the aid of the South Vietnamese attempting to prevent the spread of communism. Engaged in a war that many viewed as having no way to win, U.S. leaders lost the American public's support for the war. Since the end of the way the Vietnam War has become a benchmark for what not to do in all future U.S. foreign conflicts.
because syrup was low so people had to eat dry pancakes
The Armies of South Vietnam, China, France, and America all had their part to play in the 'Vietnam Conflict'.
This war was imortant to American history because it was the first war they ever lost.
Vietnam was part of the cold war.
Vietnam was part of the cold war.
The Confederate capture of Fort Sumter was important to the US Civil War because it was the event that led to the US Civil War.
They were concerned because at the time, China was communist so (obviously) they were supporting the north of Vietnam. China could have been worried as America had been such a big force in WWII.
All wars with all nations, excepting Vietnam. Correction: On a technical scale, the U.S. has never lost a war. The Korean and Vietnam wars were called to cease fires, except for the fact that we made the last push in Korea so the U.S. had a lasting impression, whereas North Vietnam struck again right as we left.
Kennedy added more "advisers", Johnson drafted the most men and sent in the most of the troops, and Nixon expanded the war with his secret bombings into Laos. So, the three of them escalated it bit by bit. Despite the acts of President Nixon, he had run for president on the promise to end the Vietnam War. This he accomplished.
Without widening the war with other countries (Laos and Cambodia) or risking a confrontation with the Communist Superpowers...the war was unwinnable.
South Africa had a rightwing govt, and supported the US invasion of Vietnam. Other than that. the conflict was of no concern to SAfrica
It was a moral booster just like any ohter war,except in Vietnam the troops needed mail more since we were losing.
Yes because it was lost
Last US war fought by the WW2 (Greatest) Generation.
Because the war was to help a different country
The US joined the Vietnam War in 1960 or 1955because there was a civil war between North Vietnam and South Vietnam, and the US was good friends with South Vietnam's goverment, so they helped out.
False. The US lost the Vietnam War. The South, whom the US were supporting, had become very corrupt and the US public withdrew their support for the war. The US withdrew and retreated, so their objective was not achieved, and therefore was lost.
There was no "Vietnam" during the Vietnam War. Communist NORTH Vietnam was attacking non-communist SOUTH Vietnam, and the US was trying to drive the communists out of South Vietnam...trying to stop communist aggression. It's called the Vietnam War because it's a lot easier to say, and less confusing...than to say "South Vietnam War" or "North Vietnam War", so some people go so far as to say the war in Southeast Asia instead.
The US entered the Vietnam war after ww2 because the US wanted to control Communism or stop it completely and half of Vietnam was a commie country and the US did not want the Communism to spread so we entered to stop the commie side of Vietnam and to liberate the Democratic side
It was obvious North Vietnam wasn't going to quit; so the US declared victory and went home (from the GI's perspective).
This wasn't a war of territory. It was a war of body counts...a war of attrition. However, the communists were in North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia; whilst the allies (or at least the US) were in South Vietnam with covert operators in Laos and Cambodia. So, based upon that distribution...the communists might be the ones covering the most land.
More war. Before the Vietnam War, there was the other Vietnam War (French Indochina War, aka 1st Indochina War). Before that war, there was WWII. So, they had about 3 wars straight for 35 years.