3 ms·

For most intents and purposes, that's who started it. anti-communistic fervor was, and is, a massive boondoggle.

by moosey 8y ago

AnimalMuppet 8y ago
Truman started Vietnam because of anti-communist fervor? Seriously? That was his fault and not Johnson's (who was actually president at the time of the Gulf of Tonkin)? That's... a pretty strange interpretation of history.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Truman started Vietnam because of anti-communist fervor? Seriously? That was his fault and not Johnson's (who was actually president at the time of the Gulf of Tonkin)? The US was fighting in Vietnam, against VC, before the Gulf of Tonkin. The French fight against the VC from 1950 was paid for by the US and supported by US military advisers and equipment, and the US took over the French military role in 1955 (which is why 1955 is the usual cited start date of the Vietnam War, though even that is arguably late); there was a major escalation in direct US troop involvement in the Vietnam War under President Kennedy. Johnson didn't start the US involvement in the war in Vietnam, unless you think he was running US foreign policy (including directing the military) out of his Senate office, independent of the White House.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    I didn't know we had advisors there starting in 1950 (under Eisenhower). I was dating from Tonkin. Still, those were (mostly?) advisors rather than front-line troops. Per Wikipedia, ground combat troops first came after Tonkin, which means under Johnson. Still, in no case is it reasonable to say that Truman started it.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Still, those were (mostly?) advisors rather than front-line troops. Initially, but that stopped being true well before Tonkin. > Per Wikipedia, ground combat troops first came after Tonkin Not sure which Wikipedia page you got that from but see: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Assistance_Command,_Vietnam https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Assistance_Command,... Which discusses, among other things, the 1964 MACV/MAAG-Vietnam reorg due to the scale of combat deployments straining the advisory-oriented command structure, and a similar issue prompting a naval command structure reorg in 1966. (Those reports were under Johnson, but thet largely addressed strains produced by the ramp up under Kennedy.) > Still, in no case is it reasonable to say that Truman started it. Sure, Eisenhower or Kennedy are more reasonable.
      - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
        I was at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War, which said: > By 1964 there were 23,000 U.S. troops in Vietnam, but this escalated further following the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which a U.S. destroyer was alleged to have clashed with North Vietnamese fast attack craft. In response the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution gave Lyndon B. Johnson authorization to increase U.S. military presence, deploying ground combat units for the first time and increasing troop levels to 184,000. "Ground combat units for the first time" was the phrase that, to me, said that the US was now there in a full war condition.

For most intents and purposes, that's who started it. anti-communistic fervor was, and is, a massive boondoggle.

by moosey 8y ago

For most intents and purposes, that's who started it. anti-communistic fervor was, and is, a massive boondoggle.

Truman started Vietnam because of anti-communist fervor? Seriously? That was his fault and not Johnson's (who was actually president at the time of the Gulf of Tonkin)? That's... a pretty strange interpretation of history.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> Truman started Vietnam because of anti-communist fervor? Seriously? That was his fault and not Johnson's (who was actually president at the time of the Gulf of Tonkin)? The US was fighting in Vietnam, against VC, before the Gulf of Tonkin. The French fight against the VC from 1950 was paid for by the US and supported by US military advisers and equipment, and the US took over the French military role in 1955 (which is why 1955 is the usual cited start date of the Vietnam War, though even that is arguably late); there was a major escalation in direct US troop involvement in the Vietnam War under President Kennedy. Johnson didn't start the US involvement in the war in Vietnam, unless you think he was running US foreign policy (including directing the military) out of his Senate office, independent of the White House.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  I didn't know we had advisors there starting in 1950 (under Eisenhower). I was dating from Tonkin. Still, those were (mostly?) advisors rather than front-line troops. Per Wikipedia, ground combat troops first came after Tonkin, which means under Johnson. Still, in no case is it reasonable to say that Truman started it.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Still, those were (mostly?) advisors rather than front-line troops. Initially, but that stopped being true well before Tonkin. > Per Wikipedia, ground combat troops first came after Tonkin Not sure which Wikipedia page you got that from but see: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Assistance_Command,_Vietnam https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Assistance_Command,... Which discusses, among other things, the 1964 MACV/MAAG-Vietnam reorg due to the scale of combat deployments straining the advisory-oriented command structure, and a similar issue prompting a naval command structure reorg in 1966. (Those reports were under Johnson, but thet largely addressed strains produced by the ramp up under Kennedy.) > Still, in no case is it reasonable to say that Truman started it. Sure, Eisenhower or Kennedy are more reasonable.
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      I was at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War, which said: > By 1964 there were 23,000 U.S. troops in Vietnam, but this escalated further following the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which a U.S. destroyer was alleged to have clashed with North Vietnamese fast attack craft. In response the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution gave Lyndon B. Johnson authorization to increase U.S. military presence, deploying ground combat units for the first time and increasing troop levels to 184,000. "Ground combat units for the first time" was the phrase that, to me, said that the US was now there in a full war condition.