Indochina Question Predictions (1 Viewer)

[Wahlito]

Alot of people are saying a question like

Asses tge role of nationalist leaders in determining the course f the conflict in Indochina in the period from 1954 to 1979

???

 

[apollo]

that was the question in the independent trial this year. i got 30/30 for it

 

[KillBill]

hey apollo i dont spose u hav a copy of that essay i can hav a peak at?
=)

 

[Insanity540]

our trial questions were:

"Discuss the role of the Vietcong in promoting Communism in Indochina"

or

"Assess the role of nationalist leaders in determining the course of the conflict in Indochina in the period from 1954 to 1979"

 

[Insanity540]

We also had a list of potential (practise) questions:

"Assess the difficulties that the US Forces faced subdueing the forces of Nth Vietnam and the Vietcong in the period to 1975"

"Evaluate the success of the political & military tactics employed by the Nth Vietnamese and Vietcong to achieve unification in the period 1954-1975"

"Assess the difficulties that the US faced in attempting to assist the government of Sth Vietnam in the conflict in Indochina in the period 1964-1972"

"Assess the reasons for the Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea in 1978"

"Assess the reasons for the US being unable to defeat the forces of Nth Vietnam & Vietcong" (DREAM QUESTION)

"Assess the impact of the Pol Pot regime on Kampuchea in the period up to 1979"

"Assess the reasons for growing US support & involvement in Sth Vietnam from 1954-1968"

....hope that helps....

 

[TastesGoodBut]

yeh i need major help with nationalist leaders....

does anyone have an essay typed up at all - even if its only half quality?

or at least an outline of what i would put into an essay about nationalist leaders?

 

[simmmo]

would nationalit leaders include the US? you'd have to do stuff on Johnson's policies, like domino theory and the choice of "defending the free world against Communism" over domestic policies, and Nixon's Vietnamisation. Also, Diem's repressive regime, then the the later leaders, of course Ho Chi Minh and how he was such an inspirational leader for the North Vietnamese, possibly even Pol Pot becuase it was because of his regime that later conflict hapened in Cambodia

 

[braindrainedAsh]

Nationalist leaders doesn't include the US, we found that out from the advice line... there is another post somewhere with more info about nationalist leaders.

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

so who would it include? panic attack... is it just me who hasn't got a clue about near most of these topics? u all sound so prepared

 

[s2ophie]

Diem, Sihanouk, Ho, Giap, Pol Pot, Lon Nol, Ky and Thieu to an extent...

 

[aleaha]

we got this question in our trials and well basically u have to strcuture it more coming from the nv side. here ill show u what i mean ok...
- nationalism was an important factor in the outcome of the 2nd world war (yeh). Ho Chi Minh (extreme nationalist) "In a war it is natural that there are losses and sacrifices. Our people are determined to fight one (notice the importance of this line). wE WILL ENSURE ALL SACRIIFICE FOR 10 YRS, 20 YRS OR LONGER, UNTIL WE COMPLETE VICTORY.

Then u gota talk about how the VC and the NVA uses nationalism as the basis of their strength. Soldiers were educated on the ideology of communism and they were taught nationalism. Comapre this to American soldiers (they were drafted were basically fucked off that they were there and really wamted to go home)> So really- there was no way they were going to win dude

 

[aleaha]

so anyways
u then hav to talk about that the Americans failed to realise and understimated the VCs strength- their tactics were wrong (the americans that is)- and rather than enforcing this anti communist they should have tried to 'win the hearts and the minds of the villiagers' which is what the communists achieved by appealing to their emotional desires and shit

 

[aleaha]

its is also imperative to note that the us were not unified. With nationalism ur whole argument- effectively is assessing how badly the us failed to recognize the strength and dertemination of the nv forces. think of it like this ok- the nv were fighting in their country for independce- for freedom and liberty- which they longed for hundreds of yrs. the americans- who prevailed after second world war, as one of the worlds superpowers- were simply reinstating and re-iterating their authority. initially they insitigated foreign policy and used this as the basis for justfying their reaons for pursuing Vietnam. but what ur job is in this essay is to idenify that as the war progressed, and as shit loads of ppl died- motives of the US were being questioned. rather there purpose became to glorify and reaffirm their country's supremacy. and even tho they had all the advanced tec and weaponary- it did not compare and comply with the conditions of terrain and jungle (whihc the americans were used to fighint in)

hope that helps
listen email me- and if u guys want ill send u some stuff aleaha7@hotmail.com

this is the question this yr- for sure.
GODDLUCK

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

how about 'evaluate the impact of twenty years war'? do u reckon that's likely? hope so...

 

[snooddy]

very doubtful of that 20 years war question you were asking for hehehe.....

they way i looked at it i may get lucky and get a question on the homefronts -> this being both NV, SV, and America

that question would rock

 

[Benno]

im hopin for something on Diem

 

[Chelle]

I want something on either the Us involvement, and vietnamisation or something on the south..

I would totally suck at a question JUST on the north.. i cant understand the north stuff lol