Hello, and welcome to today's history lesson.

My name's Mr. Merrett and I'll be guiding you through today's lesson.

So, let's get started.

Today's lesson is looking at the impact of the Vietnam War, and by the end of the lesson, we'll be able to assess the impact of the Vietnam War.

In order to do that, we need to use some key terms. And our key terms today are veteran and impact.

A veteran is someone who has long experience in a particular field, and impact refers to the effect or influence of something.

Today's lesson is gonna comprise of three different learning cycles, and our first learning cycle is looking at the impact of the war on the US.

So let's get going.

So the Vietnam War had a profound impact on America.

The US sent 2.

7 million of its citizens to Vietnam in total by 1973.

So a lot of those were drafted soldiers who would do one year or so tour of service, and then once they went back home, they'd be replaced by somebody else.

So out of those 2.

7 million Americans that went to Vietnam, 58,000 died and 305,000 were physically wounded as well.

Veterans of the war also had problems beyond the physical.

Roughly 500,000 suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, for which little support was offered.

For much of America, these men were reminders of an unsuccessful war that the US should not have been a part of in the first place.

The existence of these veterans was, therefore, unwelcome, and unwelcome is exactly how many of the veterans felt when they returned back to their own country.

So a quick check for understanding, first of all.

What proportion of American veterans who fought in Vietnam are thought to have suffered from PTSD? Is it one in twenty, one in fifteen, one in ten, or one in five? Choose your answer now.

Okay, if you chose D, one in five, then that is correct.

So 500,000 of 2.

7 million is roughly one in five.

So America did not just lose the war in Vietnam.

They also lost trust in their own government.

Americans in the 1950s had generally trusted the government.

US involvement in the Vietnam War broke this bond of trust for a growing number of people.

And there's a variety of reasons for that.

Some of the events have been covered in this course and they include the Gulf of Tonkin incident from 1964.

And as a reminder, this was an attack on US ships that was used to justify the escalation of US involvement in Vietnam, but it turned out to be a misrepresentation of actual events.

There's also the Tet Offensive in January of 1968.

So that was a surprise Vietcong attack, a massive Vietcong attack, and of course the NVA as well, North Vietnamese Army, were involved as well.

But it took place all across South Vietnam.

And it contradicted the confident US message that the war would be over very, very soon.

There's also the My Lai massacre of March 1968.

And although this happened in March '68, it wasn't actually uncovered and revealed to the public for about a year or so later.

But the US public were unnerved that their own troops could massacre hundreds of innocent civilians.

Old people, women, children, babies were involved in the My Lai massacre.

The secret bombing of Cambodia from 1969 to 1970 as well.

Cambodia was a neutral country.

The fact that America was bombing this neutral country was kept hidden from the US public and from Congress as well, and therefore, once it became exposed, it revealed that the government was lying not just to the people, but also to the lawmakers, to Congress as well.

And the Kent State shootings in May 1970 as well.

So this is when the National Guard opened fire on unarmed students at Kent State University in Ohio.

Four students were killed, nine were injured.

It was an anti-war protest.

It was mostly peaceful.

There were certainly, they had no guns or any kind of big weapons like that.

It was a mostly peaceful protest and they were gunned down by the National Guard.

And it was a shock to a lot of American people that their own National Guard could kill their own citizens like this.

Very, very shocking, especially considering some of them weren't even involved in the process.

They were just walking from one lesson to another.

Okay, let's go for a quick check for understanding now then.

So what I'd like you to do is match the events to their correct dates.

So just match the event to the correct dates.

Okay, let's go through these answers now then, make sure we're all happy with them.

So Gulf of Tonkin incident was 1964, the Tet Offensive happened in January 1968, the My Lai massacre happened in March 1968, the secret bombing of Cambodia occurred from 1969 to 1970, and the Kent State shootings took place in May 1970.

Hopefully you got all of those correct.

Right, let's go for our first task of the day then.

So what I would like to do is complete the table that's on the screen there by adding in a summary of why each event contributed to the loss of trust in the US government.

It's all well and good saying that these events made people trust the American government less, but you need to be able to explain why.

Why was these events so detrimental to the trust that the American people and the American government used to hold? So pause the video whilst you're doing that and I'll see once you're finished.

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully you got an okay with that task.

Let's go through some of the answers that I've got here.

Hopefully some of them are similar to what you've got as well.

So the Gulf of Tonkin incident, I said it caused a loss of trust in the US government because the attack on US ships was used to justify the escalation of US involvement in Vietnam, but it wasn't true.

American ships weren't attacked, the second time anyway.

They were attacked the first time, but there was no damage.

Well, apart from a single bullet hole in the ship, there's no real damage occurred.

Second time there was no event whatsoever, but that was used to justify America getting involved in the war against Vietnam, North Vietnam, to a much greater degree.

They Tet Offensive caused a loss of trust because it contradicted the US government's message, the fact that the war was just about to end, victory was just around the corner, and then suddenly the Vietcong and the NVA launch this massive attack across all of South Vietnam, and it really goes against everything the US government was telling the people at the time.

The My Lai massacre created a loss of trust because, for a lot of people, they couldn't link this whole idea that this horrific event had been caused by their own people.

You know, it's their sons, it's their fathers, their brothers, it's their husbands that have done this.

And it was very, very difficult for people to accept this is what happened, but except that they had to because the the proof was there.

The secret bombing of Cambodia caused a loss of trust because it revealed that the government was lying to the people as well this whole time, for an extended period of time as well.

And the Kent State shooting was particularly shocking and caused a loss of trust because the National Guard were there on behalf of the governments, and it was them that opened fire on unarmed students engaged in a mostly peaceful protest.

So hopefully you've got some idea of why these events helped to cause a loss of trust of the American people in their government.

Let's move on now though and look at our second learning cycle for today, which is the impact the war had on Vietnam.

So it's estimated that three million Vietnamese people lost their lives during the war, and of that, about 1.

3 million were civilians, so they had nothing at all to do with the fighting.

Roughly 800,000 South Vietnamese children were orphaned by the end of the war.

An estimated three million Vietnamese were people who were affected by the chemical weapons that were dropped in their country, effects which range from burns and scars to a higher risk of cancer and other long-term medical issues as well.

And even since the war ended as well, roughly 500,000 children have been born with birth defects which have been caused by chemical weapons that still affect the landscape and the people who live there even to this day as well.

There are still impacts being felt from the Vietnam War, even right up to today.

Explosive weapons also affected the Vietnamese landscape.

Before the war, South Vietnam was one of the largest exporters of rice in the world, but during the war, all of that changed.

An estimated 21 million bomb craters in South Vietnam meant that rice production was severely reduced.

Roughly half of the rice paddies in the country were destroyed, and that led to starvation, which happened during the war and for some time after.

It took a long time for South Vietnam to recover its rice production.

The image on the screen hopefully gives some indication of the impacts that the America's bombing campaign had on South Vietnam and the impact it had on farming production as well.

It's very difficult to farm when you've got this sort of devastation in your fields.

Many of the peasants who had farmed these paddies moved to the cities in the hope of finding safety, but instead, they just found more hardship.

Prior to the war, 90% of Vietnam's population was rural.

During the war, the urban population swelled from 10% population to 60% of the population.

So there's a massive migration in South Vietnam from a rural agricultural lifestyle to, not really an urban lifestyle as such, it's people are just trying to survive to a great extent, but they survived by moving to the cities.

Understandably, towns and cities could not cope with the sudden influx of people and so shantytowns emerged across South Vietnam.

Saigon's a great example, the capital of South Vietnam at the time.

The population there tripled to three million people by 1970.

Quick check for understanding now then.

What percentage of the South Vietnamese population moved from rural to urban during the war? Was it 30%, 50% or 70%? Make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose 50%, then congratulations.

That is exactly right.

So if you remember, 10% of the population of South Vietnam was urban prior to the war, and that rose to 60% during the war.

So it's an increase of 50%.

Half the population moved from the countrysides to the cities.

Just a reminder here on the screen as well of the impact that napalm can have.

So napalm can be dropped as bombs to clear forest cover, destroy supplies, and kill enemy troops.

It sticks to flesh as well.

So napalm, it's sort of like a jelly, like a fast-burning jelly.

And it's very, very sticky as well, so it sticks to flesh, it causes deep and severe burns.

In 1972, a very, very famous photograph was taken of nine-year-old Phan Thi Kim Phuc, who suffered napalm burns and that caused worldwide condemnation.

She's generally known as Napalm Girl.

You've probably seen the image.

If not, it's very easily to find.

But it was a really traumatic image that was taken.

The US dropped 388,000 tonnes of napalm on North Vietnam from 1963 to 1973.

So just a ridiculous amount of these fire bombs were dropped on the country, and of course, it devastated the local wildlife as well.

A lot of the jungle was destroyed and obviously that's habitat for animals and they were killed as well.

But of course the people were also affected by napalm bombs too.

If there's inaccurate bombs dropped, some of them could land on villages.

And there were traumatic injuries suffered.

Napalm sticks to flesh, but it also burns underwater as well.

So if anybody tries to jump into the water to try and stop the burning, it will continue to burn then as well.

It only stopped burning once the fuel has run out.

Okay, and let's go for a check for understanding now then.

So the US and ARVN were careful to avoid civilian casualties in the Vietnam War.

Is that true or is that false? Alright, if you chose false, then that is indeed correct.

But let's justify this answer now then.

Why is it a false statement? Is it false because bombing from the air did cause civilian casualties, but on the ground, troops were careful to avoid killing civilians? Or is it false because both bombing from the air and search and destroy missions on the ground caused many civilian casualties? Choose your justification now.

Alright, if you chose B, then congratulations.

That is indeed correct.

Alright, let's look at our next task for today now then.

So I'd like you to look at the source that I've got on the screen in front of you here.

I want you to think, how useful is this source for an inquiry into the impact of the war on the people of Vietnam? So I'd like you to use the source and your own knowledge to answer this question.

But let's just take a look at the source, first of all, before we do that.

So this source was from John Kerry, who was testifying before the Foreign Affairs Committee on the 22nd of April 1971.

Kerry was a Vietnam veteran with medals for bravery who became an anti-war protestor at his return to the USA.

Later on, he also became a senator as well.

And he says, "Most Vietnamese people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy.

They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing," which is shooting, "them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart.

They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone in peace, and they practised the art of survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Vietcong, North Vietnamese, or American." So as a reminder, you need to use this source to, right, answer the question: How useful is the source for an inquiry into the impact of the war on the people of Vietnam? Try and use your own knowledge as well to answer this question.

Pause the video now while you have a go with that and I'll see you once you've finished.

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully you got along fine with that task.

Let's go through the model answer that I've got in the screen in front of you here.

So I said, "The source is useful for explaining how the war impacted the people of Vietnam.

It states that Vietnamese villagers had to deal with 'bombs with napalm burning their villages.

' The USA dropped 388,000 tonnes of napalm on Vietnam between 1963 and 1973, and there were 21 million bomb craters in South Vietnam by the end of the war.

Sometimes bombs hit civilians by mistake.

The photo of nine-year-old Phan Thi Kim Phuc suffering napalm burns, published in 1972, horrified people worldwide.

The US' use of napalm was condemned because of the risk to civilians, and so it is useful that the source stresses napalm here.

John Kerry served in Vietnam, where he won medals for bravery, and then became an anti-war protestor.

His experience in Vietnam makes his account useful as he is speaking about things he actually saw for himself.

His views about Vietnamese people would have come from his own interactions with civilians, which makes them incredible and useful.

Becoming an anti-war protestor after serving in Vietnam and being awarded medals for bravery gives a lot of power to his accounts.

However, as an anti-war protestor, he would stress the negative impacts of the war on the people of Vietnam and downplay any positive impacts, if there were any." So hopefully there, you can see I've looked at both the content and the provenance of the source and I've used my own knowledge to support the statements that I've made.

I've also drawn out elements from the source and discussed them at length as well.

So hopefully your answer follows a similar vein to that as well.

So let's move on then to look at our third and final learning cycle for today, which is the impact of the war on the Cold War as a whole.

So in regards to the Cold War between the USA and the USSR, the Vietnam War had a mixed impact.

At the start of the war, the US' concern was that if Vietnam became communist, then all other Southeast Asian countries would follow.

And although all of Indochina did become communist, no other South Asian countries did.

It is also possible to argue that the US' own actions in Laos and Cambodia made it easier for communist regimes to take control.

The bombing campaigns carried out by the US as well as the invasion of Cambodia by US ground troops destabilised the countries and caused people living there to support the communist forces in their fight against the US.

This, therefore, suggests that the domino theory was false, or at the very least, not fully accurate.

And on the screen here, you can see an image of the domino theory.

So we can see that China willingly became communist after a civil war.

The fear was that all of Korea would then fall to communism, all of Vietnam would fall to communism, and then then Laos, Cambodia, all of Indochina would fall and then so on and so forth with other Southeast Asian countries as well.

Alright, very quick check for understanding then.

Name the missing domino theory countries.

So you've just seen that image.

Can you remember which countries are now missing from those dominoes? So is it USSR, Cuba, and Vietnam? Is it China, Vietnam, and Cambodia? Is it Vietnam, Iraq, and Pakistan? Or is it the USSR, Vietnam, and USA? Make your choice now.

Alright, if you chose B, China, Vietnam and Cambodia, then that is correct.

Very well done.

So Nixon's attempt to end the war in Vietnam led to the US becoming friendlier with both the USSR and China.

And part of the reason for that was to drive a wedge between them and North Vietnam.

This actually had the effect of making the world a relatively safer place because it lessened the likelihood of nuclear war breaking out between the two great superpowers, between the US and the USSR.

So that was one, that's a silver lining of the Vietnam War.

And it certainly was, it was positive, it most certainly was positive, but whether it was worth the level of devastation, the level of loss caused by the Vietnam War, that is arguable.

Alright, very quick check for understanding now then.

So which two communist countries did the US become friendlier with under Nixon? Was it Cambodia, China, Laos, or the USSR? Choose two of those now.

Alright, if you chose B and D, China and USSR, then congratulations.

That is indeed correct.

Let's go on to our final task of the day now then.

So I've got two interpretations on the screen here from Alex and from Lucas.

And what I'd like you to do is read through the interpretations and then explain what the main difference between the two interpretations is.

So let's just read through these two together, first of all, to make sure we fully understand them.

So Alex says, "The main impact of the Vietnam War was positive because the improved relationship between the US and USSR, made the threat of nuclear war less likely.

The death and destruction was terrible, but not as terrible as the outcome of a nuclear war between the superpowers would have been." So that's Alex's interpretation.

Lucas', by contrast, says, "The main impact of the Vietnam War was negative because the actions of the US didn't stop Vietnam turning communist, but did destabilise Laos and Cambodia to the point where they fell to communism.

The US caused death and destruction and only made things worse." So what you now need to do is explain what the main difference is between those two statements, between those two interpretations, and explain how you know that.

So pause the video whilst you do that and I'll see you once you're finished.

Okay, welcome back.

So hopefully you got on fine with that task.

Let's go for the answer that I came up with.

It's on the screen in front of you here.

So I said, "A main difference is that Alex says the impact of the war was ultimately positive because of the improved relationship that developed between the US and the USSR.

Lucas, on the other hand, sees the impact as negative because Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos became communist." So I could have just said that the one is positive and one is negative, which would've answered the question, but not in any sort of great detail.

Hopefully you can see that I've explained my answer as well by, first of all, saying why Alex thinks it was positive and then go on to say why Lucas thinks it was negative.

And hopefully your answer follows a similar sort of vein to that.

Alright, let's summarise the lesson now then.

So veterans suffered problems upon their return to the US.

The Vietnam War caused the US public to lose faith in their government.

The Vietnamese people and landscape suffered greatly due to the war.

And although all of Indochina became communist, no other Southeast Asian country did.

The relations between the US and the USSR and China improved due to Nixon's attempts to end the Vietnam War, which made nuclear war less likely.

Thank you very much for joining me today.

Hopefully you enjoyed yourself, hope you learned something, and hopefully I'll see you again next time.

Bye-bye.