Viet Nam War Series Lecture #1

Calvin Ma
ASA 2

During the lecture Prof. Hamamoto began by talking about the aftermath of World War II on Japanese-Americans. As is well known, due to the fact that Japan was the enemy, the United States wrongfully moved Japanese Americans to internment camps to "move them away from strategic military bases." However, the government was really just scapegoating Japanese Americans to re-assure the public of its safety. The internment camps had devastating effects on the Japanese Americans. Most of the second generation immigrants, known as Nissei, died before they were 60.

Hamamoto's lecture focused mainly on the third generation, known as Sansei, which was affected in many ways. During the war, many of them chose to join the army in an effort to prove to Americans that they supported the United States. As is normally the case during wars, these soldiers came back disenchanted from the war, and many of them turned to drugs and alcohol as an escape, effectively killing them. The Sansei also faced strong discrimination as a result of World War II. They responded not by protesting, but rather by trying to excel as much as they could in society. This led to Japanese Americans becoming part of the model minority. Also, 60% of the Sansei married Caucasians, suggesting an attempt to assimilate into American society. However, in doing so, they only showed that this type of silence was only detrimental to their people. The model minority myth was used by whites to turn the other races against Japanese Americans, making the situation even worse. Only when they began to help each other solve the drug problem, often with a little violence, and when they joined their voices with blacks following the death of Martin Luther King Jr. did things begin to get better. This resonates with the ideas in class about how staying silent is not the answer. We must take a stand and make ourselves heard to fight discrimination. Another point to take away from his lecture was that we can't rely on the help of others; we must save ourselves.

That was my biggest takeaway from the lecture. His feelings about the draft and being drafted during the Viet Nam War were also another intriguing topic. Until the lecture, I had never thought of the draft as a way for the government to essentially take control over me. Perhaps this is because the draft has not been active in the United States at any time in my life, so I have yet to think about it. I certainly did not give it a second thought when signing up for it after turning 18.



Japanese Americans who signed up for the army

The Justification of War

Tuong Le
Week 5
Response to "From Saigon to Baghdad"

The description of the "Vietnam Syndrome" was interesting to me namely because of how it changed the American public's views on what justified a war/US military intervention. With American exceptionalism, it was previously simpler for the US to utilize its armed forces in foreign affairs. However, after the horrors of and discontentment with Vietnam, the American public needed more to accept such actions.

I found it interesting that the first Gulf War was viewed as a success because it avoided many of the problems that the Vietnam war had. In particular, I found the lower number of US casualties and the lower amount of "innocent" casualties to be factors that would help me personally view that campaign as more successful, as my biggest moral issue with Vietnam was the indiscriminatory bombing/warfare that killed many women and children in Vietnam. However, I still question it and find it hard to convince myself that certain actions can be justified. Also, with how the media was controlled during that campaign, I wonder about the truth and how much the people know. Despite that, I do recognize that the media can be wrong or skew situations in ways that are negative to "the cause."

Q: Is it right for the government censor media during times of war in cases such as the First Gulf War?

Extra, because I have so many thoughts about this week's readings: With the fact that the US was attacked on 9/11, how does that skew the American public's opinion of the "War on Terror"? Does it make it more easily "justified" in the public's eyes because Americans now have a more personal attachment to the reasons for the war?

How did the idea that the Middle East might have WMD affect public opinion on the war effort being "justified"? How should the American public feel about the torture and other atrocities committed by US troops in Iraq/the Middle East?

Biggest question: Why does the US still believe that they are the most morally correct society and that they must spread their beliefs to other countries/the rest of the world? Bush cites the subsequent actions of the Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge as things that US involvement could have stopped if troops were not pulled, is his reasoning valid?

Response #5 to Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence

Sherry Yuan

Section A01

Response #5 to Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence

In Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence the author Hamamoto categorized different kinds/ types of murder and killing in the human society. The killing and murder could be done by the war, system and policies of injustice, discrimination, extreme bias and judgement, which bring to the people physical and mental constraints and pain. Regarding "Race Murder" it states that in the latter half of the 20th century, it was the race wars waged against yellow people first in Korea and then in Southeast Asia. When I read here my brain was just a blank because in my high school's history class( I went to high school in Taiwan), I didn't learn of any news about it. Regarding "A Few Good Men," it reminded me of the movie "Soldier" in 1998. The movie described how the kids can be trained as killer machines. The main character was one of the "child soldier," but once when he realized he was not treated as a human being but a killer machine, which can be dumped as he out of the "value," he has changed his mind and slightly accepting emotion.


Q: Kid soldiers are really common in Middle East and Africa countries, how can the U.S. help the kids out while not killing the people there?

Unjustifiable Murders

Response #5 to "Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence"

Reading this article, one thing that stuck out to me was that the number of murders committed has been growing over time. The author, Hamamoto, lists the different types of murders and goes into detail for each one. I was also surprised that there are some people in the world who murder others for the sake of pleasure, such as Ted Bundy, people who kill others because of resentment against others, such as Patrick Eugene Purdy’s resentment against Asians, and people who kill their own family members, such as Charles Joseph Whitman. The motives of the murders are simply unjustifiable. It is not right to kill others just because you resent someone and it is certainly never acceptable to kill your own family members. In addition, one thing that seemed really strange to me was that when Bundy was executed, women would mourn for him. Later, as I read the rest of the article, I was surprised to see that a lot of the victims of the unjustifiable murders were Asians.

Question: Why do you think that Asians are targeted as victims of murders often? What do you think should be done about this?

Jianying Yang

Section A02

Jack Wayne Reeves

The Effect of Vietnam

Melanie Wardhana
Reading Reflection #5
Response to "From Saigon to Baghdad"

When reading this article, I found it incredibly interesting how the Vietnam War still impacts politics and national decisions to this day. The impact that the Vietnam War had on the United States and other countries was so profound because of the long duration of the war and because of the severe loss felt by all countries involved. When correlating decisions made about the Vietnam War to the war in Baghdad, we can see the similarities and differences that caused so much public uproar. It is not uncommon for the public to become enraged with the loss of so many soldiers, and the seemingly waste of time that the United States appeared to have spent. Because of this impact that the Vietnam War had, we can feel the impact of the war to this day.

Question: What could have been done to stop the Vietnam War from being so negatively impactful on the world?

Americans vs. America: The Growing Divide between the Public and Government during the Vietnam War

Jennifer Le
Reflection #5
Section A01
Reading: "From Saigon to Baghdad"

   "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?" This was a chant I remember when learning about the Vietnam War, and it embodies the anti-war sentiment of the Vietnam War during that time period. In Andrew Priest's article on the impact of the Vietnam War, Marilyn Young wrote that "Vietnam is the great Satan of the late twentieth-century American history." Beyond the fact that the war was considered the first defeat in our military history, changing the political and military institutions in our country, the Vietnam War was even more significant because it changed how Americans perceived ourselves as and our relationship with government. During WWI and WWII, there was a sense of patriotism and bravery that was tied to the uniform, but the lack of moral legitimacy, accompanied with reports of soldiers killing innocent civilians and dropping bombs on villages, changed the war into a murderous, senseless, and violent action. America had become the self-righteous bully that justified his actions with American Exceptionalism. For the first time, the Vietnam War created a great internal battle between the public and the government.
    Priest's article also deals with the ties between the Vietnam War more than 60 years ago, and the Iraq War. There are many parallels between the two wars. Despite the "Vietnam Syndrome" cautiousness of foreign policy post-Vietnam War, many still regard American as a self-righteous bully hurting a smaller country. Before it was Vietnam. Now, it is Iraq. However, if there are so many parallelisms between the two conflicts, why isn't there a major Anti-Iraq protest movement today like there was during the Vietnam War? What makes these two conflicts so different in terms of the level of public protest?

Joseph Wu 

ASA 002

Response #5 

From Saigon to Baghdad

The United States have always been engaging in conflicts that really should not be since its creation. War should always be the last result. The reason why World War 2 was considered the last “good war” was because the Nazis were threatening global domination and ethnic cleansing. There was a clear “bad guy” and “good guy”. All the wars after that were not strongly justifiable. The Vietnam War was a war that went nowhere since in the end, the United States didn't achieve its intended goals of pushing Communism back and the massive waste of lives on both sides didn't justify it. The fighting left Vietnam in a bad state and the chemicals used in warfare still cause health issues. In the Middle East, drone and missile strikes have killed innocent civilians and tore up their homeland. It’s not a wonder that people from countries would resent the United States’ presence in their country.  

America has always played the role of Global Police and every generation born in this country has a war attached to it. I grow increasingly frustrated at the military spending and actions of the government when there are other issues to address. Why not help those who need money and resources? Or even fund the space program to find a way to propagate the human species to another planet? This planet is volatile and could decide to go through another mass extinction before we can prepare for it. There are so many things you can improve on or discover with several hundred billion dollars a year.

Jacky Sam
Section A02
Response 5: "Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence"

     Hamamoto addresses the strong connection between  military service and the rise of serial killers and cases of mass murders. Cases mentioned in the article include Charles Joseph Whitman and John Allen Williams. Both were men with extensive military background who brought their skills into society and terrorized innocent lives. Such actions could have been prevented following their return from service. It should not be the person's decision to receive treatment, but a requirement. Studies have shown that often times, psychological issues are not apparent in veterans following their return, but some have some type of post-traumatic stress and depression some time in their lives. 20% of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression and 50% of those do not seek treatment. Treatment can prevent mass murders, in addition to saving veterans from taking their own lives.

Question: Should the U.S. government require psychological treatment for military veterans?

International Undergraduate Tuition Issue

Jiajun Li

Section A02

Reading Reflection #3

In response to: A Tale of Two Campuses: Berkeley and Davis Respond to Occupy movements

                Why Davis chose to ignore the issues while Berkeley quickly responded to the need of lower costs still remains mystery. The tuition issue has long been the topic of debates among UCs, not just in Davis and Berkeley, but all UCs. These so-called public universities cost each students up to $22,000 per year, almost as much as private institutes like USC or Stanford. Nonetheless, tuition issue seems even more severe among international students. Based on the data on UC Financial web page, international students pay as much as $55,000 in all the UCs per year, even more than how much they pay in Stanford (annual tuition: $54,000). Ironically, high tuition didn't stop the expansion of international student group. In 2012, international students in UC Davis, for example, only occupied a percentage of 9%. In 2013, this number went to 12% and in 2014, this number drastically reached 17%. What could be foreseen is that, in 2015 or 2016, international percentage will be as much as 25%, which means by then in each four students there will be one from China or Korea. At that time, what would happen if the tuition still remains as high as almost sixty thousands per year?

                

Questions: Where does these extra tuition paid by international students go to? 

A Personal Attack

Xanh Tran
ASA 002 - A01
Response #5: Prof. Hamamoto's Empire of Death

A Personal Attack

Honestly, I could barely read this chapter. Every other sentence made me want to retch, and the other half made me want to punch someone. I was disgusted and angry, and even now -- twenty-four hours after processing it -- I'm still horrified that those unspeakable things actually transpired. There's two particular reasons I've identified as to why I feel so troubled by Professor Hamamoto's words about the targeting of Asian, specifically Southeast Asians.  

First, he speaks of the wartime murders in Vietnam and the surrounding Southeast Asian countries. My parents were both in Vietnam during the Second Indo-China War, and I know they could have been killed at any point by bombings or raids ordered by Nixon or McNamara or any other high official. But to think that their lives could have ended for by the hand of some soldier high off of power, domination, and a superiority complex both sickens and enrages me, because that's how so many of my kin died. For no reason at all, by people who had no business there.  

The second reason is that many of those murders happened to Southeast Asians here, in the United States, and I could have been one of those victims, or one of my siblings, or many of my friends. What's frightening though, is that the possibility has not disappeared nearly forty years after the fall of Saigon. In fact, it has been passed down through families by fathers or brothers who have seen war and committed acts of murder. I am not safe here from the bloodshed my parents saw, and for many of us, the war still continues.  

My question now is, how do we keep this cycle from repeating? how do we keep the imperial blowback effect after the Vietnam conflict from happening again after the conflicts in the Middle east? 

Murder is inevitable

Kristine Severo
Section A01
Reading Reflection #5

A young man holding a poster after 14-year-old Konerak Sinthasomphone was murdered by Jeffrey Dahmer.

In "Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence", author Darrell Y. Hamamoto discusses the nature of murder and how it is - and always will be - a part of human society. He also notes that many of the serial killers and mass murderers he brings up are in someway related to the U.S. involvement in wars, specifically the Vietnam War. Most of these killers do what they do because they were somehow influenced by the socioculture around them, including the U.S. military and the wars that the U.S. fought.

When Hamamoto brings up serial killers like Jeffrey Dahmer and Warren James Bland, he specifically highlights how these murderers were likely influenced by the Vietnam War. Warren Bland, for example, read a lot on what U.S. soliders have done to Asians during the war and claimed that what he did to a poor, innocent Asian American girl is no different than what the US had done overseas in Vietnam.

What fascinated me the most is how race comes to play for these serial killers. Many of these murderers are white males, who feel a certain way towards Asian Americans. The Vietnam War proved to impact these men, prompting them to commit atrocious acts to their own victims. The fact that these men felt that because they were white, that they had the power to do what they wanted to their Asian American victims is a psychological issue. I also couldn't believe that Konerak Sintahsomphone could have been saved from Jeffrey Dahmer had the police realized there was something terribly wrong with the situation. This also highlights the power that the government has in these kind of situations as well.

Question: Do you think the rise in U.S. serial killings and mass murders is due to U.S. military involvement? How might we combat this rising issue?

From Saigon to Baghdad

Joyce Wong
Section A01
Response #5

As the beginning of the article points out, although the Vietnam War was almost 60 years ago, it still impacts the present today. This war is still such a huge impact because this was during the time journalists and reporters were able to report and show the people of the United States what was really happening in the war. By seeing what was really happening in Vietnam, this brought a movement in the people to end the war. Now, we do not see such involvement in the wars as before. Although there are valid reasons why journalists and reporters are not allowed to show the people the real truth of what is happening right now, isn't that going against the freedom of press? Don't the people deserve to know what is going on currently in the war now like back then?

Also, in the article, Andrew Priest notes that "American Public Discourse focused upon learning lessons so as not to repeat the supposed mistakes of the Vietnam era". One of the ways to prevent this is the "Vietnam Syndrome". I believe that this is incredibly silly because no one can really amount "to a set of criteria that should be met if the U.S. is to commit troops to battle". No matter what, no human being can really amount to much horror and violence that happens during war. Also, who determines if the troops meet the criteria?

Vietnam Syndrome

Lan Nguyen
Sec. 1
Entry #5

            In the excerpt ''From Saigon to Baghdad: The Vietnam Syndrome, the Iraq War and American Foreign Policy", Andrew Priest, analyzes the concept "Vietnam Syndrome". The concept is defined as the perception of the "impact and legacies" of the Vietnam War through literature. It is also perceived to be the impacts of the war on U.S Foreign Policy. Priest also analyzes the many ways that literature has perceived the Vietnam War. Scholars try to analyze and find reasoning behind the war and the traumatic effects it left on civilians. The Vietnam War has left a scar on American society affecting politics, culture, and the debate of the justified reason of the occurrence.

response 5 Empire of Death

Jesse Lee
Response 5 Empire of Death

 The Empire of Death was a very hard article to read, especially towards the end of the article.
The article is very hard to read because it provides many cases of gruesome murders and acts of violence that were committed by serial killers, psychopaths and some of our men at arms who served the united states armed forces. This article brings up the issues of violence that we as human beings have. Violence is no small matter to talk about. It is often swept under the rug and very often sanitized in media, but this article points out some of the gruesome issues we have with violence. When you train a person to kill, to hunt other humans by means of guerrilla warfare, strategical planning and weapons training, you are preparing that person for a lifestyle of war. It would only be unnatural to throw that warrior into a civil lifestyle. It doesn't make sense to take a person, turn them into a trained killer to only throw them back into a place where killing is a crime. There is another issue with violence that I would rather focus my attention to, and that is the culture of violence in our society. Especially the conditioning of violence for young boys using sanitized violence. We are raised to love and glorify violence. This can be seen in the media many times over. Just look at all the violence in the cartoons, the toy soldiers, the violence in entertainment business such as mixed martial arts. We raise our boys to glorify violence.

My question is: Do you think violence is necessary for humanity to advance civilization?

In Response to: “Empire of Death” by Darrell Y. Hamamoto

Last week one of my former classmates, who was half Japanese, was murdered by her boyfriend.  As I was vocally trying to grasp situation, my boyfriend said, “I don’t understand murder.” This comment struck me because to me murder was a  “mundane social fact,” as Hamamoto comments, “that transcends historical epoch, geography, and culture.”  I had never taken the time to actually try and understand murder before.

While reading I was angered by the story of Warren James Bland, a white sex criminal, whose primary victims were Asian women.  Bland took on a mail order bride from the Philippines, whose family hoped that Bland could somehow save the family from poverty, and then presumably killed her when she tried to escape.  I believe that Bland targeted Yellow females because they are stereotyped as submissive and are exotified in the media.  Perfect sex-slave material.  Furthermore, Hamamoto attributes the rise in murder to the legitimization of violence in American society, rooting from the Vietnam war.  Additionally, Yellow people have become the preferred victims of sociopaths because in the second half of the twentieth century Yellow people were the targets of race wars in Korea and Southeast Asia. 

I can’t help but wonder, where these factors to my friend’s murder?  On some level they probably were because Hamamoto states that “murder does not occur in a social vacuum.” Will this knowledge bring me any closure or any closer to an understanding of murder?  

Breana Inoshita 

Section A02 

Reflection #5

Power, Murder and an ASA Student Named Aaron

In response to, “Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence.”

In this article, Dr. Hammamoto gives multiple examples from a variety of different time periods to show how militarism and a given milieu can affect murder and how society reacts to it. As the article progressed, it was evident that more and more of the murders were associated with the guns and war. As interesting as the article was, I couldn’t help but finding myself upset and shocked at how gruesome a few of the examples were. I am not sure if what sickened me was the detail given in each example, or the overall fact of how Dr. Hammamoto was able to tie the killers to those with power. However, I was most shocked when the article gave an example of how Richard Nixon gave orders for the bombing of neutral nations during the Vietnam War. Whatever the outcome he expected, or motive, this example made Dr. Hammamoto’s point of how elite policy intellectuals and government bureaucrats are similar to mass murderers proven to me. Furthermore, these actions are not done without any “blowback” as the article ends by describing recent terrorism and how our nation “reaps what it sows.” When those with power act with similarly to the murderers listed in the article, our nation follows by producing anarchy.

Question: Is the comparison between those with power and mass murderers correct? Do you think certain decisions by those with power truly affect how the entire nation thinks and how each individual acts?

Aaron Handa

Section A02

Post-Vietnam War

Kurt Romero
Section A02
Response #5 - "From Saigon to Baghdad"

The Vietnam War has left many traumatic experiences for America to continue to intervene with other countries. War should never be the answer to anything because it only causes more deaths and grudges. We gained nothing from winning the war. We try to be in good standings with Vietnam, but instead we still have conflicts with them. I am beginning to question the methods of the U.S. because it seems like we continue to become instigators invading and settling in other countries. Many years after the Vietnam War, the U.S. is back at it again with Iraq. This is starting to become a habit of the U.S. and it needs to be stopped. I don’t think we need another traumatic experience when we are still recovering from the Vietnam War. However, from the readings, I’m glad to know that after the devastating war, the U.S. tries to avoid intervening with foreign affairs in the future. The government has learned from their mistakes and maybe in the future the U.S. won’t have to resolve with wars.

Question: Do you think the U.S. should still have its military forces settled in foreign countries still and why?

A Helping Hand

Danny Wong
ASA 002
Blog Post 5
Response to Empire of Death

In Empire of Death and the Plague of Civic Violence the author Hamamoto breaks down the types of killers that exist in the world. It ranges from Serial Killers to Cannibals and Headhunters. Within those categories Hamamoto explains what they are and summarizes a significant event within that type. The one that stood out to me was the “A Few Good Men” section. This type is about killers who were formerly part of the military and then became murders. This section was particularly terrifying because I want to believe that most killers out there or at least a good amount of them do not know what they are doing and just follow what they might possibly see on tv, but “A Few Good Men” listed a few individuals that used to be part of the military. By being a part of the military it provided them with the sufficient training to help me eliminate their targets and be effective at it. Knowing that there were actual military trained killers out there makes it seem like the government should initiate a program that follows up on ex-soldiers to prevent things like this from happening. I know this is not possible due to the limited funds and the large number of retired soldiers, but it could be a good program of prevention.

Question: Do you think the government should redirect some of its R&D funding to potential programs like the one I mentioned to help soldiers who are in trouble from going out of control?

This Means War

Ben Weller
Section A02
Reading Reflection week 5
In Response to "From Saigon to Baghdad: The Vietnam Syndrome, the Iraq War, and American Foreign Policy" by Andrew Priest

War is inevitable. Let me be clear though, war isn't necessary and is definitely not ideal, but for the world we live in, it is inevitable just the same. The only question about inevitable war is how and if resources will be invested. In Andrew Priest's article, he addresses this by describing "Vietnam Syndrome". He describes Vietnam Syndrome as a general idea that the US should not interject in International conflict unless there is just reason, there is a clearly attainable objective, and minimal casualties will occur.

I believe that Priest makes very great points and in general is correct about Vietnam Syndrome. The lessons learned from the Vietnam war should be used as example for other wars such as the Iraq war. However, I also believe that the lesson shouldn't set the standard for wars. While I do believe that the Iraq war parallels the Vietnam war and the procedure learned from the Vietnam war should take place, I also believe that each war case should be taken individually and assessed accordingly. We do not need a specific "to do" list whenever a similar war comes up, but we should definitely take in to consideration each war before it.

Questions:

1) Although the purpose of war is peace, what is actually being accomplished in each war?
2) Are we able to learn from each war before history repeats itself?

Reflection #5: Ending the Cycle of Killing

Calvin Ma
ASA 2

In Hamamoto's piece, he strives to show that killing is killing and that much of the violence in the United States is an aftereffect of the wars, particularly the Vietnam War, that it has participated in. The war, for some veterans and civilians, was a justification to discriminate against Asian Americans. As a result, it would seem that the obvious solution to preventing future violence would be to end the culture of militarization that participation in wars has fostered. This culture can be seen clearly in the huge numbers of protesters to anti-gun laws we see today. In fact, the right to bear arms written in the Constitution was a direct result of the American Revolution, where colonists felt they were being treated poorly by the British Empire intruding on their lives. However, with the world set up as it is today, trying to end the cycle of violence is difficult. The presence of countries like North Korea threaten the possibility of resolving issues without military involvement. Thus, it appears unlikely that the cycle of violence will end anytime in the near future. However, it should be a goal which we continue to strive for.        

Q: Is violence or racism actually the root of the problem? Each leads to the other, but it is hard to determine where the cycle actually began.



A picture of protest against apathy to violence and racism