How exactly did the U.S.' official reasons for going into

>>1853444

well there's the thing about tonkin being a CIA falseflag used as a pretext to enter the war but fake outs are how the US enters most of its wars anyway

>>1853444

Johnson objectively lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

We wanted to corner the Asian heroin market. That was it.

>>1853513
>>1853517
>>1853526
If these three are taken as fact, then the parrellels between 'Nam and Afghanistan are fucking spectacularly similar.

>False flag attack
>Huge drug market secured
>Tons of money to be made in contracts
>Thousands of Americans killed for no reason

It just keeps going on and on

>>1853513
>>1853517
He's not asking about the justification for the War, he's asking about the reason war was desired.

>>1853594

What's the afghan false flag attack? And is there really a drug angle? Strikes me as absurd.

>>1853793
Yes, but understand that the Gulf of Tonkin wasn't some EU4 "I now have a war claim to get my DoW so I can annex things, lel". People actually thought the Gulf of Tonkin was a reason to fight a war.

>>1853594
If you want to go all "economic interests conspiracy," Afghanistan was about natural gas pipelines, not poppies. Do you know anything about Afghanistan?

Plus, the US joined the Vietnamese war at the request of the South Vietnamese government created after the Paris Peace accords.

>>1853444
I think the official reason (domino theory) was what american leadership actually believed. Sure there were some business interests that benefited from south vietnam but that was limited.

I remember my grandfather telling me a story about going to south vietnam to explore the prospect of building a factory for his business there, and came away very disillusioned by just how much they were demanding in bribes. After that trip he was convinced the country was just another shithole run by crooks that we were propping up for no reason, and that the war itself was an absolute waste.

>>1853797

> And is there really a drug angle?

Yes but it went the other way around. It was the US who gave the opium fields to the mujaheddin in the 80's.

>>1853444
Zilch. According to internal documents from Johnson, McNamara, Ambassador Bundy, General Thompson and General Taylor, and even the CIA, the real fear was that dominoes would fall. You have to realize that in 1954 the U.S. made a promise to RVN that should the situation arise when U.S. intervention became necessary we would help them. After the first Gulf of Tonkin incident (which the DRV fully admits happened), the U.S. was fully prepared to enter, but Johnson tempered the jingoism of McNamara and others and after the second GoT incident (which may or may not have happened, we legitimately have no idea) Johnson could not ignore the threat any longer. There were absolutely extra reasons, like Michelin Rubber plantations, but these were tertiary goals. The primary goals were those stated by Johnson: To make the war seem unwinnable to the DRVN so they stop funding and supplying NLF forces in RVN and cease attacks South of the DMZ. The issue is that Johnson was a strategic retard so any action taken was a "piecemeal commitment" according to Generals of the time and DRV saw through it.

>>1853444
Japan would go commie if it didn't get cheap rice.

North Viets wanted the rice of the Mekong too.

>>1853444
Cornering the Asian heroin market, Gulf of Tonkin false-flagging.

>>1853594
Literally the military-industrial complex. This is not new. There have been like 3 years since 1790 that the US wasn't at war

Never understood the whole "le all us wars are about secretly trafficking drugs" meme. Is there really any reputable evidence that the CIA is selling drugs on the scale that they'd convince the government to fight wars just to secure poppy fields or whatever?

>>1854618
Like, for the cost of a war, the U.S. government could just BUY some poppy fields.

>>1854565
>heroin market
Really? By this you mean conquering the entire southeast Asian market, right? AKA stopping communism?

>>1853816
>Plus, the US joined the Vietnamese war at the request of the South Vietnamese government created after the Paris Peace accords.
>Paris peace accord is 1973
>US joined the war at 1954
Also Diem was sponsored by Americans

>>1854661
>By this you mean conquering the entire southeast Asian market, right
The U.S. would have had more access to a DRV controlled SEA in 1954 than the one we got. The DRV offered the U.S. a full monopoly on DRV markets in 1954 with zero CHICOM and COMBLOC influence. The U.S. declined. If it was about markets, the war would have ended for the U.S. in '54 instead of '73.

>>1853797
>afghan false flag attack?
>Nebur ferget

There's this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers#Actual_objective_of_the_Vietnam_War:_Containment_of_China