I used to think that The Gulf of Tonkin incident and containment ideology were the main reasons for why US involvement in the 2nd Indochina war was escalated, but Resource 1.3 extended my thinking because it highlighted how French (military outpost's) defeat to the Viet Minh in the battle of Dien Bien Phu also caused increased US intervention. The French defeat lead to peace talks in Geneva, where competing strands of North and South Vietnamese ideology solidified the division of Vietnam. This event also ushered in greater intervention by the US as US was determined to keep Vietnam democratic and free from communism (and influence from the USSR). It became increasingly apparent that peaceful unification of Vietnam was not possible as force had to be used to reunite Vietnam under one ideology.

Thus, I now think that the collapse of French peace talks also played a crucial role in escalating US involvement in the 2nd Indochina war.

I used to be unsure and not know how the faliure of the Ngo Dinh Diem regime had directly led to the Vietnam War, but because of resource 1.3 I now understand how Ngo Dinh Diem had done so based on things like the development of the Vietcong.

I used to think that Ngo Dinh Diem was assassinated by the locals of South Vietnam because of the coup staged but resource 1.1 extended my thinking because it highlighted how the CIA had indirectly supported his overthrowing and assassination. Thus now I think that the US has a larger role in manipulation of internal politics than the Vietnamese nationalists.

it illustrates how the us and use didn’t wanna fight a direct war, and thus used vietnam to fight against each other’s interests.

it also shoes the complex internal struggle such as how both SV and the US both intervened to assassinate diem.

before i studied this conflict, i thought it was a very simple north vietnam vs south vietnam, but later on i understand the complex domestic landscape within the SV had a very large impact on how the conflict turned out

I used to think that the Tet offensive was significant only in strengthening anti-war sentiments in the US alone as it exposed US uncertainty in winning the Vietnam war. However, resource 1.4 extended my thinking by highlighting how the Tet Offensive also led to a change in strategy for the United States. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had previously focused on a policy of gradual escalation, began to shift towards a policy of negotiation and eventual withdrawal from Vietnam. Thus now I understand that the Tet offensive not only played a large role in pivoting the social landscape of the US towards the conflict, but also the political aspects of the warfare.

I used to think that the US backed ngo dinh diem so that they could fight communism indirectly using south vietnamese troops, but resource 1.2 showed me that the US had initially intended for a stable Southern government and prospects for peaceful reunifcation.

political policy as all i knew was that it led to the support of the Viet Cong. But resource 3.1 extended my thinking because it highlighted how it not only led to the support of the viet cong, but also adopted a hard stance on their demands only accepting the complete and unconditional withdrawal of US forces while the US thought they could force the vietnamese into accepting concessions as to pass off an American victory. The Vietnamese government also aimed to pull the pacifist international community over to their side, adding pressure to the US to halt their invasion. All these actions of the Vietnamese government led to further resistance against the US when then further prolonged the war. Thus, now I know how important the involvement of the Vietnamese political policy is and that it okayed a huge role in resisting against the US.

i throughly enjoyed the video, and i actually thought it was some random video on youtube, but was actually one of the former aa projects.

similar to no.1 it illustrates how the us and use didn’t wanna fight a direct war, and thus used vietnam to fight against each other’s interests.

however it dewelves deeper into how the war impacted both the US and Vietnam, and educated me on the vary and negative effects of the conflict, something i was. not very well versed in before studying this conflict

action but he would not listen, reflecting

badly on the US and causing them to lose

control over diem and support of locals in

south Vietnam. Thus now i think that the US had a role to play in the failure of the Diem's regime which led to increased US military in South Vietnam.

I used to think that the US withdrawal from the 2nd Indochina war was due to the major military costs and causalities as a result of warfare with the North Vietnamese forces and Viet Cong. Resource 2.2 extended my thinking because it highlighted how growing US domestic public opposition of US involvement in the war was a crucial actor in sparking US withdrawal. The rap lines in the 5th page of the script show many US citizens viewed US military actions as immoral because of the war's sheer devastation and violence caused war, and that the conflict was attacked Vietnamese independence, directly violating US ideology. It suggests how domestic US opposition against the war and the government directing it, in addition to diminishing belief in the success of the war and increasing views that resources were being wasted on funding this campaign, was the final straw that led to the US withdrawal from Vietnam.

Thus, I now think that public opinion was one of the most significant reasons that lead to US withdrawal from Vietnam nearing the end of the 2nd Indochina War.

action, he would not listen. This reflected

badly on the US and cause them to lose

control over diem and support of locals in

south Vietnam." Thus now I think that even though US heavily influenced and supported the War, some events that occurred were out of their control like this instances which progressively lead to them losing the war

I used to think that the battle of Dien Bien Phu did not have much significance in the next indochina war, however resource 1.3 showed me that this battle was the trigger that made the french negotiate peace terms and created the split along the 17th parallel, setting the stage for the future war through the confidence gained by the vietnamese nationalists

taken away as they realize that victory was not close, weakening US support for the war in Vietnam and causing protest to arise. Thus, now i think that the tet offensive had a huge impact in the rising protest against the war and played a huge role as a turning point in the war.

the video really helps show how this conflict was fundamentally unwinnable for the US. With the entire NV population participating in the war effort against the US in some form or another, as well as VC and VM sympathisiers in the south ( there were many ), it shows how a conventional colossus had no chance against the unbreakable determination on the vietnamese ( like how spurs still determined and actually won smth )

this helped to re-evaluate my understanding of this conflict. I initially thought it was a simple david vs goliath battle in which the vietnamese were david. However re-looking through this video was the true david the us, with their troops facing hate speech in their own homeland and going against the behemoth that was was the unwavering determination of the vietnamese ? This just shows how many layers there are to this conflict, and that one can keep one learning new stuff about it.

I used to think that the reason for US persistent military involvement in the Vietnam war was to contain communism in the face of the Domino Theory. However, resource 2.4 made me realise that although eradicating the spread of communist spheres of influence was a contributing factor that made the US persist in the Second Indo-china war, another incentive was conserving US credibility and international reputation. By persisting and pushing North Vietnam to surrender, it would prove to other nations that the US was capable of containing communism despite not winning the war. After an extended period of spreading US political agendas and being strongly anti-communist, pulling out of the conflict would make other countries lose respect for US, and even encourage more communism takeovers. Hence, in the name of American honour, coupled with their ideological stance, these factors worked hand in hand in incentivising the US to persist in the warfare despite the high costs it came with.

I was aware that the Vietnamese people were significantly affected by the war campaigns, particularly the Buddhists who suffered persecution and discrimination under Diem Ngo Dinh's regime. Many were imprisoned for protesting against Diem.

Resource 4.4 extended my thinking because it highlighted how US used herbicides in replacement of chemical warfare to prevent breaking the 1925 Geneva Protocol. The herbicides were as harmful to humans and some contained carcinogen and arsenic, leading to contamination of air, food and water. According to the Vietnamese government, this resulted in an estimated 400,000 deaths and exposure to over 4.8 million people.

Thus, I now think that the scale that Vietnamese locals were affected by the war is much higher and the impact of the war was significantly severe and consequential.

I used to think that extent of military involvement by the US only extended to carpet bombing, as seen in Operation rolling thunder. However, resource 4.4 made me realise that the US also resorted to chemical warfare, with the use of Rainbow Herbicides. With the use of such chemicals, the US allowed Vietnamese troops to be exposed in battle and thus easily targetted by US aggressors, as the Vietcong and North Vietnamese army tended to get the upper hand on the Americans by using the abundant foliage of Vietnam to hide themselves and their supply routes, especially in the infamous Ho Chi Minh Trail. Additionally, these herbicides would also help to kill crops that could act as sustenance for these enemies. Hence, this shows the extent to which the US went in their fright in the Vietnam war.

I used to think that civilians in the Vietnam war were not the main targets of the two sides but from the source i know understand how the various military forces all directly targeted civilians such as with the use of such as with the use of Agent Orange or other chemical bombs that destroyed crops, contaminated water supplies, and caused long-term health issues. These tactics show that civilians were not just caught in the crossfire, but were deliberately affected as part of broader military strategies aimed at weakening the enemy’s support base and morale.

I used to think the US intended to get increasingly involved in the war, but 1.4 taught me that they intended "Vietnamization" and gradually shifting the fighting burden to the South Vietnamese army, showing that the US did not want to be so heavily involved in fighting

I used to think that China and USSR always had good relations due to having common enemies and their communist background, however 3.2 showed me that China and USSR fell out due to deviations in the beliefs of the new leaders, thus showing that countries still have their own initiatives against their fellow allies.

I used to think that citizens would appreciate the efforts by war veterans, but 3.3 shows how the US vietnam war veterans were shunned by the public and took the blame for losing the war and for the war crimes committed, showing that the US people greatly hated the Vietnam war.

I used to think that the vietnam was a clear cut conflict between the US and the North VIetnamese. However after reading this resource I am above to discern that this was not the case as there was various levels of involvement from different parties to shift the tide of the war.

documents after the war had evidence that US officials distorted the truth." This means that the US might have fabricated there reason as to why they should be involved in the war and triggered the start of the war despite no factual reason to do so but rather to stop the spread of communism in Vietnam and in Asia.

I used think that there was a basic level of communist assistance from china in that they simply provided matèrial to help bolster the North VIetnamese. However after reading this resource I understand that the soviet union also polayed an integral role in this conflict, firstly by giving their word as they were the leading communist power and as such their approval was taken as a good thing. Secondly there were tensions between the chinese and soviet union. This can be seen by Khruschev’s condemnation of Maoism. However I believe that the Inforgraphic could also incorporate some tactical and operational elements that the North Vietnamese possessed in-order to win the war. For example, the usage of ambushes to catch American troops off-guard and the constant rotation between villages were key tactics utilised to overcome the goliathan American Military.

I used to not be so aware about the flaws of the Northern regime. However, after a while reading the resources, I have noted how the North VN government made a major mistake with their land reform that showed their true nature. Before the escalation of the VN War, land reform was conducted by the Hồ Chí Minh government from 1953 to 1956. To put it simply, thousands of innocents were executed with no basis of accusation and this land reform (Cải cách ruộng đất) remained as one of the few dark marks in the VN Communist government's history that the present day regime is keen to cover up. Resource 1.4 has also brought to my attention how the South VN's regime, however corrupted it later came to be, had partial success with their land reform (Cải cách điền địa) (they only failed because of the assassination of Ngô Đình Diệm, causing the initiative to come to a hiatus). Now, I have come to understand that the VN War is a complex conflict, with no clear "good side" or "bad side" (the North VN was just as, if not more corrupt than the South -- covering up horrific truths to maintain reputation, killing thousands and lying to thousands of others for their own benefit). The side that won is not necessarily fair nor virtuous, the only thing that can be concluded is that they were more strategic, more clever, more opportunistic (nature of war).

I used to think that the factor that cemented the division of Vietnam into north and south regions was solely due to their ideological conflicts. However, this resource extended by learning as it made be realise that the peace talks initiated by the French government after Vietnam Minh’s military confrontations with French forces was what led to the agreement to divide vietnam along the 17th parallel in the first place. The competing strands of Vietnamese ideology between the 2 regions of Vietnam was what led to a growing conflict between the 2 regions that ultimately into the 2nd Indochina war.

because… but resource extended by thinking as it highlighted how…

From the Infographic, I learn that the Text offensive was integral for the collapse of american trust in the Vietnamese Conflict. I learn that although operationally this offensive was a failure, as the Vietnamese were not accustomed to conventional warfare which the American’s were masters at, the psychological impact of the offensive was massive in mobilising public support against the American government. Thererefore this is what I learnt

Iused to only be aware of the political and military involvements of the US I supporting the Viet Cong to win the 2nd Indochina war.

However, this resource extended my understanding by allowing me to understand how the Soviet Union was also heavily involved in supporting the Viet Minh in the 2nd Indochina war. This was due to competition between China and the USSR to see who could provide Vietnam with more aid, proving to the other contender that they were more superior.