Dear Editor:
This letter is in response to Joshua Magill's column entitled "My Terms" that appeared in the April 12, 2002, issue of the Daily Egyptian. In the column, Magill asks the question, "Were we [the United States] fighting FOR America during the Vietnam War?" Magill answers in the negative and says we were fighting for the South Vietnamese. He goes on to say that he does not advocate war when "we are not specifically attacked or our security interests are not at stake." Magill speaks of admiration for Franklin Delano Roosevelt for trying to keep us out of World War II until the attack on Pearl Harbor.
I agree that we were fighting for the South Vietnamese during the Vietnam War, but I submit that we also had our security interests at stake. The main reason for our troops being in Vietnam was to prevent the spread of Communism, an objective our military accomplished while involved there. The Johnson and Nixon administrations and advisors learned from the mistake of FDR of not getting involved earlier. They learned that if you sit on the sidelines, eventually you become involved anyway at greater cost than attempting preventive measures. Communism had to be opposed wherever it attempted to spread.
The shortsighted American public and other political leaders did not recognize this threat and demanded an end to our involvement. The involvement ended, and South Vietnam fell AFTER we left, but we had made our point to the Communists. They recognized that if they attempted a larger spread, they would be opposed. The conflict also assured our veterans, finally, that they fought, and their buddies died, to preserve freedom.
Braden E. Willis III
junior, journalism
Published on 11/17/05; 12:24:44 PM
