The US was in a complex situation with no clear-cut path to victory; however Fulbright suggests that we must recognize the fundamental problem with our foreign policy. He says that we must accept a government elected and supported by the people, even if it is communist because "American interests are better served by supporting nationalism than by opposing communism." Basically, the US needs to rethink their foreign policy in general and formulate a response in Vietnam and elsewhere according to all the factors of the local situation, such as recognition of the power of nationalism and the recognition that not all revolutionary movements are solely communist oriented. This is not the only instance where US intervention was justified on the basis of defending freedom against communist movements. Intervention in the Dominican Republic in April 1965 and as recently as the American invasion in 1983 of Grenada were just a few examples of American suppression of self-determination and support of repressive, undemocratic regimes, strikingly similar to US support of Diem and the other regimes that followed in South Vietnam. The US needs to seriously reevaluate its stance on foreign policy and to stop wasting money on anymore "open-ended" wars. Bibliography Fulbright, J. William, The Arrogance of Power. (1966) Johnson, Lyndon B. "Our Duty in Southeast Asia" (1965) William A. Link et al., American Epoch: A History of the United States since 1900 Affluence and Anxiety 1940-1992, Volume II (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993) In the early 1960's, North Vietnam wished to unify North and South Vietnam through military force. Since the United States feared the spread of communism in Asia, John F. Kennedy provided economic and military aid to South Vietnam to prevent the takeover by North Vietnam. At this time, this was still a civil war. The United States were not yet officially involved. The North Vietnamese resented this intervention by the United Sates and so, three Vietnamese torpedo boats fired on the U.
