Home > ’To abandon Viet Nam would be wrong’ - Text of speech by President Lyndon (...)

’To abandon Viet Nam would be wrong’ - Text of speech by President Lyndon Johnson, April 7, 1965

by Open-Publishing - Saturday 2 July 2005
2 comments

Wars and conflicts International USA History

President Urges Patience on War — but it’s LBJ, in 1965
"To abandon this small and brave nation to its enemies, and to the terror that must follow, would be an unforgivable wrong," Johnson said. "To withdraw from one battlefield means only to prepare for the next." At that moment, only 400 American boys had died in the rice paddies. Here’s the complete text.

By Greg Mitchell

(June 29, 2005) — As the press continues to argue over what President Bush said, didn’t say or should have said about the war in Iraq on Tuesday night, I’ll take this opportunity to simply roll out, as food for thought, the words of another president caught up in a difficult conflict not quite in its final throes. Here is a speech delivered by Lyndon B. Johnson on April 7, 1965. Make of it what you will. You can supply the editorial comment if you wish (e-mail address below).

***
Tonight Americans and Asians are dying for a world where each people may choose its own path to change. This is the principle for which our ancestors fought in the valleys of Pennsylvania. It is the principle for which our sons fight tonight in the jungles of Viet-Nam.

Viet-Nam is far away from this quiet campus. We have no territory there, nor do we seek any. The war is dirty and brutal and difficult. And some 400 young men, born into an America that is bursting with opportunity and promise, have ended their lives on Viet-Nam’s steaming soil.

Why must we take this painful road? Why must this nation hazard its ease, its interest, and its power for the sake of a people so far away?

We fight because we must fight if we are to live in a world where every country can shape its own destiny, and only in such a world will our own freedom be finally secure.

This kind of world will never be built by bombs or bullets. Yet the infirmities of man are such that force must often precede reason and the waste of war, the works of peace.

We wish this were not so. But we must deal with the world as it is, if it is ever to be as we wish.

The world as it is in Asia is not a serene or peaceful place.

Of course, some of the people of South Viet-Nam are participating in attack on their own government. But trained men and supplies, orders and arms, flow in a constant stream from North to South. This support is the heartbeat of the war.

And it is a war of unparalleled brutality. Simple farmers are the targets of assassination and kidnapping. Women and children are strangled in the night because their men are loyal to the government. And helpless villagers are ravaged by sneak attacks. Large-scale raids are conducted on towns, and terror strikes in the heart of cities.

The confused nature of this conflict cannot mask the fact that it is the new face of an old enemy. The contest in Viet-Nam is part of a wider pattern of aggressive purposes.

Why are these realities our concern? Why are we in South Viet-Nam?

We are there because we have a promise to keep. Over many years, we have made a national pledge to help South Viet-Nam defend its independence. And I intend to keep that promise.

To dishonour that pledge, to abandon this small and brave nation to its enemies, and to the terror that must follow, would be an unforgivable wrong.

We are also there to strengthen world order. Around the globe from Berlin to Thailand are people whose well being rests in part on the belief that they can count on us if they are attacked. To leave Viet-Nam to its fate would shake the confidence of all these people in the value of an American commitment and in the value of America’s word. The result would be increased unrest and instability, even wide war.

We are also there because there are great stakes in the balance. Let no one think for a minute that retreat from Viet-Nam would bring an end to the conflict. The battle would be renewed in one country and then another. The central lesson of our time is that the appetite of aggression is never satisfied. To withdraw from one battlefield means only to prepare for the next. We must say in Southeast Asia — as we did in Europe — in the words of the Bible: "Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further."

Our objective is the independence of South Viet-Nam, and its freedom from attack. We want nothing for ourselves-only that the people of South Viet-Nam be allowed to guide their own country in their own way.

We will do everything necessary to reach that objective. And we will do only what is absolutely necessary.

We do this in order to slow down aggression.

We do this to increase the confidence of the brave people of South Viet-Nam who have bravely borne this brutal battle for so many years with so many casualties.

We will not be defeated. We will not grow tired.

We will not withdraw, either openly or under the cloak of a meaningless agreement.

We hope that peace will come swiftly. But that is in the hands of others besides ourselves. And we must be prepared for a long continued conflict. It will require patience as well as bravery, the will to endure as well as the will to resist.

I wish it were possible to convince others with words of what we now find it necessary to say with guns and planes: Armed hostility is futile. Our resources are equal to the challenge.

Because we fight for values and we fight for principles, rather than territory or colonies, our patience and our determination are unending.

 http://www.editorandpublisher.com/e...

Forum posts

  • How HOW did this happen again? How can a country be fooled so obviously in the same manner?

    I think the answer is that the activists were too nice. Somehow the people who supported the atrocity in Vietnam were allowed to go back into their holes where they told themselves that the war wasn’t so bad. Heck, some people still think Nixon wasn’t so bad. I have heard folks say that ’we helped those people’ in Vietnam.

    Even though many democrats, many activists are not the ’I told you so’ type folks...perhaps this time ’I told you so’ is what is needed. After we stop this atrocity, we must show people the pictures, show them the results of our collective apathy. Sure no one likes that, but apparently if we let people forget, it is so easy to drift into denial that history repeats. We need to transfer the ’leave no child behind’ fund from testing to improving our history classes instead. It seems that history classes in school are few and far between these days, most likely because they don’t wan’t us to remember our mistakes of the past. In my education in California, we never discussed Vietnam, JFK,MLK or anything important in recent US history that might be pertinent to current affairs. We need to teach the children about the true meaning of patriotism and our responsibility as citizens.

    Personally I don’t want to leave this same mess for my kids to deal with as well. The Bush Administration has finally illustrated the corruption of the Military Industrial Complex and the bold stupidity of the super greedy so obviously that the entire world should wake up. We cannot waste this opportunity. To quote Dennis Kucinich "It is time to make war archaic"!

    • How can this happen again is a manifold question and requires manifold answers.

      However, what seems to has escaped you is that the group of people who came to the realization of what Vietnam was are not longer here living or have full faculties.

      The current crop of American Whites are a new set of peoples who much learn the killing and what it means as a lesson learned afresh.

      You question would be relevelant if it were addressed to the generation who fell through the Vietnam times, but it is completely innane if asked now.

      The other thing that escapes people like you is that the American White is a bundle of hate; is ignorant to anything beyond his own self; disregards anything that does not fit in with some preconvieved notions of his being as superior in everything; lacks complete depth and scope of history; has many, many weaknesses, including that he is easily spooked and projects his weaknesses and imorality onto others not like him and then sets out to destory this in others [and thus destroying others in the porcess.]

      Bush, like most Whites, creates considtions and reacts to those circumstances. Then says, "See, it was like I said it was". Most Whites are not made for reality. Their world is made up of the imagination and unfortunately for the rest of us who live here [and on the planet earth] must suffer through until the empire sinks under it’s own weight.

      I would encourage you to stop thinking of Americans as some clean, high worshipping, moral peoples and consider your own personal growth and honesty.