Why did the USA lose the Vietnam War?

Why did the USA lose the Vietnam War?

The Americans did not lose purely for military reasons. There were other factors as well.

Write an explanation AND cite a source which shows the importance of the following six factors:

1. US military tactics in Vietnam

The U.S. used a combination of bombing, chemical warfare, and search-and-destroy techniques when fighting the Viet Cong. (pg. 358-359, The Vietnam War). They went full frontal: bombing cities all over Vietnam, as well as Laos and Cambodia; using Agent Orange and napalm with no concern for damages to civilians or their dwelling place; implementing a severe lack of control during the search-and-destroy missions. All of these tactics, while they may have been effective at ratcheting up the number of Viet Cong casualties, also killed thousands of innocent civilians. This quickly turned the American populace against the war; without the support of its own people, there was no way the U.S. could have won.

2. The unpopularity of the South Vietnamese regime

Although the U.S. backed each and every South Vietnamese government, each and every one was corrupt. (pg. 354, The Vietnam War) The Vietnamese people had contempt for such governments, and were angry at them for not protecting their people more. It is highly difficult to institute an idea into a country when no one supports the idea in the first place; this is exactly what the U.S. was trying to do. They lost the war because no one - not the Vietnamese people, not the American soldiers - were really passionate about what they were fighting for; barely any Vietnamese wanted the Southern government in place anyways.

3. The experience of the Viet Cong and the inexperience of the American soldiers

The Viet Cong quickly learned that, in order to terrify and confuse the U.S. troops to the maximum amount, guerilla tactics were the best tactics to use. The American soldiers were unused to this style of fighting; they became scared of every Vietnamese person they saw, sure that they were really a Viet Cong fighter. The U.S. morale plummeted. (pg. 356, The Vietnam War) Also, the Americans were not used to fighting in jungle conditions - diseases and fatigue wore down the troops nearly as efficiently as the Viet Cong did.

4. Domestic opposition to the war in the U.S.

As mentioned before, it was impossible for the U.S. to win the war when it had little to no support on the home front. The new major usage of media played a big part in this; people were watching on television the Vietnamese children burning from napalm, they were reading in the newspaper about Kent State; the news surrounded then. (pg. 360, The Vietnam War) Protests sprung up all over the U.S.; the reason the U.S. finally began to pull out of the war was because the level of public dissent had become unbearable.

5. Chinese and Soviet support for the Viet Cong

From the time of the Viet Minf, both the Chinese and the USSR were supplying money and supplies to the Viet Cong, enabling the Viet Cong fighters to be just as technologically advanced as the U.S. troops. (pg. 353, The Vietnam War) This meant that the U.S had very little upper hand; they had no tangible advantage. Also, it meant that the U.S. could not use nukes on Vietnam without fear of immediate retaliation. The U.S. lost the war in part due to the fact that the Viet Cong and the U.S. troops were fairly equally matched technology-wise; the Viet Cong were simply more passionate and better used to the conditions.

6. 'But did they really lose?' Summarize the argument put forward in Source 57, and your view on it.
Source 57 claims that from a few standpoints, America technically could not have lost the Vietnam War. From a military standpoint, the U.S. never actually lost any major battles. Also, the Fall of Saigon occurred after the U.S. had pulled out - by that point, it was completely South Vietnam's problem. Finally, most of the people who were forced to evacuate during the Fall of Saigon were Vietnamese people; it was not the American military being forced out.

While this seems to be a good argument in theory, it is an argument put together by looking through only a few loopholes. No, the U.S. did not lose any major battles, but they were constantly losing smaller battles every day; killing innocent civilians in an attempt to eradicate the Viet Cong cannot and should not be counted as a victory. The Fall of Saigon came after the U.S. left, yes, but that doesn't exempt the U.S. from any blame or ties to the war; there were, in fact, still American non-military personal still in Vietnam giving aid to the Vietnamese people at that time. The main issue with Source 57's argument is that if the U.S. could not decisively lose the Vietnam War, then they also could not decisively win the Vietnam War. There is nothing that suggests an American victory anywhere within Vietnam, and in my opinion, the immense loss of life, resources, and respect that the U.S. suffered cause the Vietnam War to be counted as a loss for America.