The Policies Of Eisenhower 's Vietnam And John F. Policy

Kennedy’s structure of foreign policy was much different from Eisenhower’s foreign policy. During the Eisenhower years, America had a detailed national security structure, with a “massive retaliation” idea, while Kennedy was more informal, with his “flexible answer”, which I think fit his New Frontier model. After the rigid structure of Eisenhower, Kennedy and his advisors wanted a new, less formal way of dealing with international affairs. He was an activist, who was very popular with generations both young and old, and I think that he brought a new idea of informality to the way the White House worked. For example, he preferred to work directly with the officers in the Department of State, and he relied on his assistant for national security affairs, McGeorge Bundy, instead of the usual Operations Coordinating Board. In dealing with crises, and seeking advice, Kennedy had a small number of close advisors that were also his friends, one of which was his brother Robert Kennedy, the attorney general (Miller Center).

In 1960s, the US was faced with another crisis of communist expansion in the war between North and South Vietnam. The Kennedy Administration decided to further pursue their containment strategy out of fear being seen by the international community as weak towards communism. During the Johnson Administration, an attack against American vessels that happened in the Gulf of Tonkin led to President Johnson being granted the ability to conduct broad military operations without congressional approval. The American public began to largely oppose American intervention in Vietnam because the optimistic statements made by the government ran contradictory to the reports of the violent fighting by American news outlets. During the Nixon administration, the US switched to a policy, later known as Vietnamization, where the main goal was to strengthen the South Vietnamese forces and provide them with better armaments so they can better defend themselves. Vietnamization proved to be ineffective as the South Vietnamese forces were unable to hold their own against the North without US air support as proven during Operation Lam Son 719 and the Easter Offensive. The signing of the Paris Peace Accords officially ended US involvement in the Vietnam War. The US followed containment policies during beginning of the war due to the underlying fear of the spread of communism and since the policies were inherited from previous

Kennedy had many accomplishments during his short presidency. One of these accomplishments was in regards to the Cuban Missile Crisis. He played a lead role in figuring out how to settle this with the Soviet Union. He also abolished the federal death penalty in 1962. He initiated Project Apollo which ended up accomplishing landing the first humans on the moon between 1969-1972!

Throughout the mid to late twentieth century the United States was extremely concerned with their foreign policy due to mishaps that surfaced as a result of lazy administration when dealing with communism. As an example, one mishap was how the Truman Administration dealt with China after the KMT surfaced following WWII. Instead of immediately defending the People’s Republic of China, the United States stayed mostly secluded and independent and let China slip into the favor of the KMT. This was an example of the United States’ being too moderate in their foreign policy. However, on the other hand, there were examples where the United States was too aggressive in their foreign policy. An example of this was how the US chose to dealt with North

Eisenhower’s administration took many actions to strengthen anti-communist states and prevent the spread of communism. One example would be the use of former President Truman’s containment policy to prevent ware between the U.S. and the USSR. Another example would be, to prevent the Soviet Union from attacking the U.S., the Eisenhower administration began massive retaliation or the mass building of nuclear weapons. This would help the United States save money and cause our enemies to think twice before starting an attack. The USSR building nuclear bombs themselves put the U.S. at risk (Doc E), this should be taken with a grain of salt though because the potential of a war and destruction was too much of a risk for both countries to attack. This potential put both countries back at a stalemate position. Ultimately, massive retaliation acted as a protective barrier for the U.S. and American citizens, calming the fear of

The Vietnam War, lasting for approximately 20 years, was the longest and one of the most controversial wars in American history. Not only did the war take a heavy toll on the American troops fighting abroad, but it also led to riots and tension amongst Americans on the homefront. Two presidents devoted to winning the war against the spread of Communism in Vietnam as quickly and effectively as possible were Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. Although Johnson was a Democrat and Nixon was a Republican, their foreign policies in Vietnam were similar because they both kept secrets about the war from Congress and because both of their foreign policies were disliked by the American public. However, they differed because Johnson escalated the United

JFK’s relationship with Congress was decent at first. After a little while their relationship got better. A couple of John F. Kennedy’s legislative successes and failures are more equal rights for Americans and the overthrow of Fidel Castro’s regime. A statement of JFK I think can best explain the policy outcomes. His statement was “Ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country.”

January 1969, Richard Nixon entered the executive office picking up the pieces Lyndon Johnson who had left while the Vietnam War was still in effect. Many Americans had the expectation that Nixon would be the “peaceful president”, visualizing he would put an end to this war in Southeast Asian and bring back home our troops. A policy Nixon redefined was the American role in the world by suggesting to limit the U.S resources and commitments. Therefore, Nixon’s set his efforts to end the war since the withdrawal from Vietnam was not an immediate option. Also, Nixon had his radar on Moscow and China because according to George C. Herring, they felt that they must release the United States from the war in a way that would uphold United States credibility with their friends and foes alike. During Nixon’s term in office, he tries a number of different strategies in his effort to end the war, but to this day, one can see that Nixon only prolonged the war when it could have ended earlier.

The impacts of Kennedys choices against the Soviets did not just create changes in his political life, but his personal one as well. During the Cold War he and the vice president Lyndon B. Johnson, both promised the country they would keep a tough act on the Soviets, and

On the 7th of April 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave one historic press conference [1]. In that conference, he announced his so called “Domino Theory”. It was a substantial aspect of the US involvement in the Vietnam War, involvement in terms of its military support and methods used in Vietnam. Even though it was greatly enhanced by other factors, such as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, it was the trigger, and therefore the source of all US involvement in the Vietnam War. The main rationale of the theory was that if one country fell down to communism, all the surrounding countries would do the same, hence why it was called the ‘Domino’ Theory. Eisenhower thought that Vietnam’s fall to communism would lead to consequential communist uprisings in neighboring countries, such as Laos, Cambodia and Thailand. He also that that it could possibly extend as far as India, Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Australia and New Zealand -[1]. This gave The US enough motivation, and more importantly, justification as to why they greatly increased military presence in Vietnam. Eisenhower said, “The possible consequences of the loss [of Indochina] are just incalculable to the free world.” [2]. Even though the theory was imprecise, and only Laos and Cambodia joined communism after the US lost the war, it was significant as the foundation of the US involvement in the conflict.

Policies regarding the involvement in the war and other foreign events varied based on the president at the time. The first president who had to deal with the issue in Southeast Asia was John F. Kennedy. Kennedy had a very perceptive view on foreign intervention, understanding that some issues could not be solved by something as simple as a full scale invasion or a display of military prowess. When possible, Kennedy always sought to negotiate his way through a problem, believing that there were other ways to solve an issue that did not include violence or threats (Blight and Lang). In his inaugural speech, Kennedy said, “So let us begin anew—remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always

Kennedy. President JFK supported West Berlin, Germany during the time the Cold War, when communism had taken over. During this time, West Berlin was against communism. The main thing that many people admire about President Kennedy was that he recognized the Army Special Forces, the Green Berets. This was a historical moment, and by the time of his death, the Special Forces had doubled in size. President Kennedy also handled the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Here, President Kennedy order a naval blockage around Cuba. This was an attempt to stop the Soviet Union from bringing in more military supplies into Cuba. Following, the Soviets did remove their missiles from Cuba and President Kennedy in a televised announcement, requested that Americans rethink the stereotypes and called for a time of peace. His values to me show a hard workingman who cared deeply about his country. Even back in 1946 when Kennedy was campaigning for House, it is said that he would go

When discussing Eisenhower, Gaddis details the massive retaliation policy adopted by Eisenhower and John Dulles. “The New Look’ as it is referred to, was instead of building up the military by providing more men, instead it would be cost effective to build up arms, and threaten nuclear attacks if the Soviets attempted to influence other areas across the globe and spread communism. With Kennedy and Johnson both, the return to NSC-68 and Vietnam are covered by Gaddis. With more military and economic support for preventing communism, troops were spread to places in Vietnam specifically and across the globe attempting to resist communist forces in many places. This ‘flexible response’ was in essence reducing the power of the army as a whole. The defeat in Vietnam and the flexible response method used by Kennedy and Johnson was judged harshly by Gaddis. The final administration covered by Gaddis was the Nixon presidency. This period, known as Détente, signals a return to Kennan’s approach to an extent while combining policies from the Kennedy and Johnson diplomacy. Nixon and Kissinger worked towards establishing international rules of conduct in which the Soviets and China would soon follow promptly and the balance of powers in the world would provide for stability.

Thomas G. Paterson grew up during the Cold War, even though he did not go into the army, he did research about the war while it was happening. The book Kennedy’s Quest for Victor American Foreign Policy 1961-1963 covers all of the aspect of Kennedy's foreign policy. Kennedy had foreign policies with 6 countries, Asia, Africa, Canada, Europe, Latin America, and Vietnam. The policy cover subjects like the atomic policy, Cuban Missile Crisis, Peace Corps, and economic policy. This source will help understand what Kennedy was going through with other countries when it comes to certain policies that I listed above. I believe this a secondary source.This books has quotes from people that were going through the Cold War. On the back of the book states

This span of time allows for the analysis of how a president changed throughout his presidency in terms of their decision making. Such an understanding is relevant because it can determine the strengths and weaknesses of a person in power that can either be exploited by political opponents or improved upon by future commander-in-chiefs to determine the overall effectiveness of the president. This topic was of interest because an analysis of the both of the events can present the way in which John F. Kennedy changed in relation to his foreign policy between 1961 to 1962.