Introduction
The Vietnam War is one of the most controversial events in US history, also considering the war’s aftermath and consequences on the whole American identity. President Johnson, at the time, was the one promoting the beginning of warfare attacks on US troops in Vietnam. Johnson’s deep commitment to the Vietnam War and alternative strategies can be explained by the popularity of conflict, as well as the perfect timing for the president to be involved and the domino effect of the fear of communism.
Main Body
One of the main ideas behind the ideology of warfare was the domino theory. It could be argued that many scholars and politicians believed that with the fall of one capitalist regime, other countries would become communist states as a result. The fear of losing the dominance and alliance in the East Asian region fueled Johnson and his supporters to continue warfare actions and be more involved in that area. That is why Johnson was partially forced to move troops to Vietnam.
The popularity of his decision was also evident throughout the US population and political elites. Noted by Nelson (570), the long-standing belief of democrats in the ability of the US to resolve most of the international conflicts impacted the whole population. In addition, they felt a responsibility to defend liberal values in the world. Furthermore, Nelson’s ability to start warfare was enabled by the rally effect after the Gulf of Tonkin incident, where his power in terms of military control grew significantly (Nelson, 571). Considering these facts, it was evident that warfare in Vietnam was a useful tool for popularity increase and elite control for Johnson. Thus, his actions seemed to be perfectly balanced and justified for him.
Conclusion
To conclude, it is evident that Johnson had alternatives for the resolution of conflict. He could have established diplomatic negotiations with both conflicting sides or even ignored the warfare at all. In addition, Johnson could have sent a limited number of troops or only military supplies to his capitalist allies. Still, most of the actions could have led to the loss of US allies and thus would harm his reputation as president. Any alternative actions here would not be able to predict the way of thinking of communists, and therefore, there could have been a different course of events. Political Science, however, does not allow us to predict the future.
Works Cited
Nelson, Michael. “The Historical Presidency: Lost Confidence: The Democratic Party, the Vietnam War, and the 1968 Election.” Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 48, no. 3, 2018, pp. 570-585. Web.