The Instigator
FreedomArcher
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Theunkown
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Vietnam War Hawks vs Doves

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Theunkown
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/11/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,109 times Debate No: 60292
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

FreedomArcher

Pro

Although there are reasons that America shouldn't have instigated a war in Vietnam there were major reasons for joining the war.

Whoever joins this debate. Welcome and I hope we have a good debate. The first round is agreement. Second Round is discussing. Third round is conclusion
Theunkown

Con

I accept, I argue that the United States should not have been involved in the Vietnam war.

Debate Round No. 1
FreedomArcher

Pro

No one can deny that at times it may have looked bleak. But if the US had kept at it, they would have indeed won. There have been many battles in which the US have proved that they were going to win. At the battle of Khe Sanh as well as the TET Offensive, 20,000 North Vietnamese and Viet Cong soldiers attacked a US Base who only had 6,000 Long story short they won with 10,000 dead on the North Vietnamese side and only 2,000 men on the US side. It's because they had superior trained and armed. And if General Westmoreland had been given the 206,000 more troops that he had asked for then he would have been able to win the war then and there. As well has the Tonkin debacle, the US were attacked, we were patrolling the gulf and the North Vietnamese patrol boat fired upon us. What else were the US supposed to do. Another point in the Domino Effect, if we let Vietnam be Communist then goodness knows how many other countries will fall to that dreaded system. Asia already has 450 million people lost under dreaded communist dictatorships. And there can"t be any further losses.

These are my points, I hope to hear your response soon
Theunkown

Con

*Quotes from Pro are Italicized and Underlined*

Pro has taken the usual American stance that I expected. With complete negativity to anything and everything that is 'communist'.


Another point in the Domino Effect, if we let Vietnam be Communist then goodness knows how many other countries will fall to that dreaded system. Asia already has 450 million people lost under dreaded communist dictatorships. And there can"t be any further losses.

The majority of the Vietnamese people wanted a communist government, whether it is good or not is another debate. I am a pro-socialist however I do know that many communist regimes were terrible. Vietnam was NOT one of them.


Many of the Vietnamese considered America as the heir of French colonialism and the unpopular President Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam as its puppet emperor.[1]

However, the popularity of the North Vietnamese government was soaring. People even defected from the South to the North.

"Of the estimated 20,000 guerillas at least one third are South Vietnamese. The other are either northern "volunteers" or Southern refugees now living in the North."[1]

Without doubt, the majority of the vietnamese wanted a united communist vietnam. Therefore it is only democratic that Vietnam should be united in a communist government.

A democratic United States should not have tried to go against the will of what the majority of vietnamese want. Let them decide their own future, how can the US intervene?

The United States does not have the right to invade any country as they please just because they prefer another economic system.

The US committed many war crimes in Vietnam, such as using chemical weapons.

"During the Vietnam War,
between 1962 and 1971, the U.S. military sprayed nearly 20 million gallons of material containing chemical herbicides and defoliants mixed with jet fuel over parts of Vietnam"

My souce [2] shows many of the birth defects children suffer even today and of course, the large scale slaughter of innocent civilians.

This could have all been avoided if the United States minded its own business instead of poking their imperialist noses into Vietnam (hey, thats what the vietnamese feel).


Sources:

[1]http://www.thecrimson.com...;
[2]http://www.dailymail.co.uk...;
Debate Round No. 2
FreedomArcher

Pro

There is no rebuttal that some people in South Vietnam wanted Communism but what about the people that wanted democracy as they all get a say in what the government did and that was what the US troops in Vietnam were trying to fight for, freedom of speech. What the Con side has mentioned is that 'many communist regimes were terrible. Vietnam was NOT one of them.' What I want to know is how do you know? Everyone knows that the idea of Communism is just a theory that never works properly and if Vietnam had chosen that system they will have found that they don't get a say and the government chooses things for them. The US were not the only aggressors. The Vietcong during the battle of Hue systematically rounded up officials and 'traitors' and killed them. Some by burying them alive. What a example of Communism

Communism always fails.

PS. No matter what I say I know I will probably lose
Theunkown

Con

The Vietcong during the battle of Hue systematically rounded up officials and 'traitors' and killed them
Pro makes allegations but has no source to back this up. Even if we were to believe him, those officials are not civilians, they were enforcers of an totalitarian government (South Vietnam) which the people hated.

There is no rebuttal that some people in South Vietnam wanted Communism

I proved that the MAJORITY wanted communism, not just some.


US troops in Vietnam were trying to fight for, freedom of speech
Freedom of speech maybe, but freedom of choice? If the US invasion was successful, would the Vietnamese have a choice to be communist? No, they would be a puppet of the US.

but what about the people that wanted democracy
It is a common misconception that communism can never be democratic, this notion is incorrect. Infact since most people in vietnam wanted communism, it can be argued that it is somewhat democratic. Defenitely more democratic than South Vietnam.

Pro implies that the South Vietnamese government was a democracy. This is incorrect, South Vietnam was a dictatorship[1], and was unpopular with the people unlike the North. My source clearly states that South Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem was a "president with dictatorial powers" and he ruled till his death (this is what the US fought for, a dictator)


What the Con side has mentioned is that 'many communist regimes were terrible. Vietnam was NOT one of them.' What I want to know is how do you know?
It was the communists who freed Vietnam from the French and communists who united their people and drove away the US invaders as per the people's will, be it north vietnamese or south vietnamese.


Everyone knows that the idea of Communism is just a theory that never works properly...Communism always fails.
That is no reason to invade other countries killing innocent civilians with chemical weapons.



PS. No matter what I say I know I will probably lose
Why are you saying this? To get sympathy votes? Please do not tell me you have gone to that level.


If the US had not invaded vietnam, the country would have been united faster, the southerners would not have suffered under an unpopular dictator, people would not have lost their lives and their family member's lives and children would not be living with chemical weapons affects today.

Hence the United States should not have waged war in Vietnam.

Vote for Con


Sources:
http://global.britannica.com...;
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by IndianaFrank 3 years ago
IndianaFrank
America entered Vietnam to even the balance of power. The communists were providing arms to the north Vietnamese so we supplied to the south. However it soon became simply to make money on armaments and the no win approach was totally wrong.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
FreedomArcherTheunkownTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con used several sources to back his argument there was also many of con's arguments that went unresponded to.