Justin Mancino

A.P. U.S. History

Professor Carlson
June 15, 2017

Domestic and Foreign differences in American Will Power during WWII and Vietnam

Throughout its existence the U.S. military has been a formidable foe and demonstrated

unwavering force, valor, honor, and integrity. America’s domestic strength has been just as great,

with many citizens willing to give their lives for a world free of evil and hatred. World War II

represents one of America's finest examples of cooperation and support between soldiers and

citizens, as many at home sacrificed countless hours in factories building resources and

supplying food rations.1 On the battlefield, American soldiers had a defined, clear enemies in

both the Nazi regime and the Japanese who attacked Pearl Harbor.

Two decades later, soldiers and citizens did not share the same sense of clarity of

purpose. Many at home disagreed with the Vietnam War and protested tirelessly while soldiers

could not find a just or clear reason for fighting the enemy. This theme resonates in Tim

O'Brien's, The Things They Carried. While America always demonstrates great military prowess,

their political arrogance, untrustworthy government and lack of domestic support created a

disastrous war in Vietnam.

In 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared America must be “the great arsenal of

democracy”2. The strong government presence and leadership during WWII inspired many at

home to work in factories to produce military resources for Britain at the time. Also, many

citizens were extremely willing to work in factories since they were struggling with the Great

1
Goodwin, Doris Kearns, No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt: The Home Front in World War II
(New York: Touchstone Books, 1994), 626.
2
Graham, Otis L., Jr. and Meghan Robinson Wander, Franklin D. Roosevelt: His Life and Times (New York: Da
Capo Press, 1985), 464.
Depression. In Vietnam, Tim O’Brien explains that soldiers made promises to themselves and to

God and to their mothers and fathers, hoping not to die. In different ways, all soldiers did this.

Afterward, when the firing ended, they would peek up. These soldiers, relieved they were still

alive, also feel shame, then quickly hide it so they remain tough to others.3 Soldiers in Vietnam

were young men who lead a decent life back home, none of them expecting to participate in a

war. There was no motivation to fight, no reason, just government ambitions. Unlike the WWII

American heros that are often spoken about, soldiers in Vietnam had personal ambitions to

survive and leave that place. A soldier in any war would like to leave the war zone, but Vietnam

soldiers had a hard time adjusting to their battlefield. The soldiers were not volunteering as

much, America's political arrogance set up drafts for unsuspecting young men ready to start their

lives. American politics had enormous power and felt that Vietnam was an opportunity to use it. 4

Unfortunately, Their plan for success backfired and America was in deep.

U.S. Citizens had Slowly lost trust in their government and therefore could not support

their decisions. The government's machismo and race to defeat communism blinded their view of

the citizens and soldiers outcry and disapproval.5 In the early seventies the Pentagon Papers were

exposed to the public, by this time American people had little to no trust. The pentagon papers

admitted America was losing in Vietnam while the government had been reporting winning

numbers. During WWII U.S. citizens have full trust in their government, they were out of the

depression, the soldiers were fighting reasonable enemies and social order was much more

controlled. The government had a clear goal in WWII while during Vietnam they took a step too

far and could not find their way back. Lacking the trust in something that is making important

3
O’Brien, Tim, The Things They Carried(New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1990),18.
4
Statement by Leslie Gelb to Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, May 1972.
5
Gelb, 1972.
decisions for you does not blend well and Vietnam shows us today that losing trust in the

government hinders the country's efforts to achieve its goals.

Most commonly known about the failure in Vietnam is due to the lack of domestic

support while at war. After WWII, America began to get involved in more wars but had less

objectives. The people noticed this and protested why go to war at all. The only answer for the

government was anti-communism.6 The thought of losing to communism was enough to keep

America in Vietnam, even if the statistics were not in their favor. Outside the government, times

in the sixties were extremely different compared to the forties. This includes much more social

outcry for equal rights and the rise of liberalism. The war just another topic, many protested

peace as they were motivated by black protest movement and protests from the LGBT

community. Compared to WWII, no one was spending their time making bullets, giving rations,

or producing resources for the soldiers in Vietnam, at least not to the extent that was achieved

during WWII.7 Both wars are prime examples of how important domestic support can be during

wartime. In Vietnam it was almost like the soldiers were fighting on their own and as Tim

O’Brien subtly shows in his book, each solder deals with their own personal dilemma from home

that exemplifies how they were affected by domestic support and the war.8

Vietnam was in many ways a complete disaster for the U.S. and they felt the

repercussions. WWII was the perfect puzzle piece for America, but Vietnam was equivalent to

placing a square block into a circular hole- the government could not figure it out. The political

arrogance, domestic support issues, and untrustworthy government were all candidates for the

U.S. failure.

6
Gelb, 1972.
7
Chambers, John Whiteclay II, The Oxford Companion to American Military History (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1999), 819.
8
O’Brien, The Things They Carried, 1.