Additionally the conflict in Korea allowed the USA to demonstrate its military capabilities to the world, and help to increase UN credibility. However, despite US concession to accept containment as an accomplishment, North Korea remaining communist can be seen as an American failure. In 1950, the US made the decision to invade North Korea. This switch to rollback policy shows that their goals were higher than just containment. They were defeated by Chinese ‘dragon’ attacks, which in December 1950 caused the most humiliating retreat in US history, totalling 300 miles.
Therefore, the US created unconditional terms of surrender, knowingly going against the Japanese ethic of honour and against the institute of the emperor, whom most Americans probably wanted dead. Consequently, the use of the atomic bomb became a way to avenge America's fallen soldiers while also keeping the USSR in check in Europe. The Japanese civilian casualties did not matter in this strategy. Also, it did not prevent the Cold War, as the USSR was just a few years behind on a-bomb research. At the time, revenge, geopolitics and an expensive project that could not be allowed to simply rust away, meant the atomic bomb had to be hastily deployed “in the field” in order to see its power and aftermath – though little was known about radiation and its effects on humans.
The idea of “containment” and not letting the Soviet Union gain influence and control of the region was perhaps the biggest and only factor for the United States assistance in South Vietnam. In its quest for world supremacy, the US felt it had to do anything in its power to ensure that they would remain on top, even if it meant fighting the Soviets in proxy wars like that of Korea and Vietnam. From a strategic and political view, the war was an absolutely necessary and even though many feel the US had lost, they were better off than had they just remained passive and allowed Communism to spread. More than anything, the Vietnam War was a message to the rest of the world that the US could, and more importantly would, engage in conflict in attempt to ensure that democracy remain the prevalent political and economical ideology existent across the
How far was the Korean War a military and political success for the USA? The Korean War was an arena of war between the US and the USSR, the extent to which it was a militant success and a political success was minimal. The outcome of the war produced more military success, than political success, the most important reason being that the US was not able to achieve their target of containment of Communism, and hence, could not unify Korea under a capitalist rule. The USA’s military objective was to prevent the DPNK (North Korea) from invading and taking over ROK (South Korea). It can be said that there was significant military success due to the several militant achievements, for example; the US was able to restore ROK to its former state, prior to the invasion by the DPNK.
War Introduction/Thesis Statement The Korean War started in June, 1950, as North Korea launched an all-out assault on the south. What was already a tense, international situation became a more formidable crisis for America, its policy makers, and the military.  Truman's decisiveness in committing American forces to the battle in Korea earned him renewed support from the public, and the string of victories won early on by American military forces, helped gain Truman increasing approval from his country. Both President Truman and leader of the military, General MacArthur, thought that prior to the Chinese intervention, total victory over North Korea was near. After the assault of Chinese soldiers in the mountains of North Korea caused
Fay states that none of the European countries wanted war however in each of the countries, political and military leaders did certain things that lead to the declarations of war and the mobilization of troops. These leaders also failed to delay the onset of war. According to Fay each country was, to some degree, guilty of the war. Fay wrote that Austria was more responsible for the immediate cause of the war than any other country. He writes that Austria was acting in self-defense against the eroding "Serbian and Jugoslav agitation which her leaders believed threaded he existence".
However, the blowback does not only transpire here in America it happens in other countries as well. Chile is one example where blowback didn’t occur in the US; however it was a blowback to the US because they didn’t see this coming. US military involvement abroad after WWII often caused blowback. Many US involvements abroad have helped people in the book Eagles Shadow Mark Hertsgard gives some positive examples. The author states, “Nor have all of America’s overseas military interventions been on the side of darkness.
Without the USA ,it could not carry its duties responsibly. When faced against aggressors, it could do nothing. Britain and France often acted in their self interests. The Hoare Laval Pact showed that that two of the League's most powerful members were wiling to work against the League.The USSR was the only one that could have sent troops but it was not in the League. The Manchurian Crisis was pretext for the failure of the League.
But after the announcement it rose to 49.7%, an increase of almost ten percent!17 It is clear that the Nixon administration wished for the visit to China to affect the voting preferences of the American people and to make them see their President in a new light. Communists cannot be trusted. They have never been truthful. Why should they be truthful now? What would they gain by having the United States of America as an ally?
Therefore both Korea and Vietnam presented policy-making challenges not present in World War II. Containment of communism was the policy that governed U.S actions in both-Korea and Vietnam to many Americans communism in Asia did not pose a direct threat to the united states as did World war II or the cold war in Europe this led to less sustained support for the Vietnam war in a sense Vietnam was a replacement war in which the united states was fighting an enemy other than Vietnam. Although he had no official policy making position at the time Richard Nixon fully expressed the rationale for the war while addressing the common wealth on California on April 2, 1965 (this is a confrontation not between Vietcong and Vietnam or the united States but between U.S and the communist