Why couldn't the United States Bomb its way to victory in vietnam?

The reading was about how important air power was in the modern war. Everyone wondered why the bombing did not win us victory in the united states and it was not because of the bombing but the decision makers that did. President Johnson had the united states start bombing North Vietnam in February 1965. Miltary officials thought that United States should have gone with operation rolling thunder which was to keep bombing north vietnam until it is completely destroyed but instead they made the military fight with one hand tied behind their backs. The president also had the military not bomb places where the other countries borders had lied since they did not want the other countries to have an issue with the united states. China and the Soviet Union helped North Vietnam by supplying them goods and merchandise such as rice. because of the support of those countries North Vietnam was able to stand against the bombing by the United States.

1) What did the North Vietnamese do when the United States bombed their bridges?

2) Do you think if the president went with operation Rolling thunder that things would have gone different for North Vietnam?

March on Washington

what is the author arguing?

Dr.Martin Luther King Jr. is arguing for the freedom and equal rights of all African Americans. He is saying that even after 100 years later African Americans are not free. He goes on to say “One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and chains of discrimination”. Dr. King is saying that even after a long period of time the life of an African American is no different today as it was one hundred years back. He just wants the African Americans to get the freedom that they rightfully deserve.

 How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

In this argument Martin Luther King Jr. is being very logic because he is saying how all people should be treated equal. In this speech he goes on to say” I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”. He is saying that it is not right for one to judge someone by how one looks like but to see within them and know them as a person. Another thing is that Dr. King is showing is pathos by explaining how hard it is for the African Americans to go day by day and live in separation and be treated differently when they should all be treated the same. In his speech he goes on to say “that all men, yes black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This shows that all he wants is for his people to be treated the same as a white person and to get the freedom they rightfully deserve. Dr. King is showing ethos. He shows it when he says “I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood”. He is showing ethos by this because he just wants to get the equal rights and for no one to have hate towards one another.

What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

This speech is very significant and relevant because it was a change that occurred in history. This was the last speech ever to be given by the civil rights leader before he was killed. It showed us that because of his speech and determination we were able to change history and many colored people did get the rights that they deserved. If it was not for this speech many people maybe still today would not have the rights that they rightfully deserve.

 Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

I found the authors argument very convincing because no one should be judged by how they looked like. The African Americans have the same rights as the whites and they should be given them. Dr.King had many great points in his speech and why everyone should be treated differently. If our constitution and declaration of independence said that everyone should get the fair rights than they should be given those fair rights. Just by how one appears does not say how they are as a person.