Indochina (1 Viewer)

[braindrainedAsh]

What was it about? What was it like? Was it what you expected? Hard or easy?

What did you think of this year's Indochina questions? How did you go?

 

[Supra]

it was more difficult actually choosing the question than actually writing the essay...i did part 1 and my teacher afterwards was glad i did, she sed it was an easier question and she knew that i kneqw my stuff bout communism and policies and stuff...

 

[Craig]

In my view this was by far the best section. I did the second question and it was great. I made the link between the Vietcong, the role of the media and how it led to the anti war movement, which then shaped Nixon's three policies of vietnamisation, peace talks and the madman theory.
I also wrote a fair bit about the TET offensive, and the Mai Lai massacre and what it showed.

 

[em_516]

i did part b also..same stuff as you..cept i forgot the my lai massacre..ah well..i thought it was a really good question though..

 

[welshi]

i thought question a was a bit too restrictive, i wouldn't have been able to write that much on it. i thought the second one was great, i wrote 12 pages because i found it really easy to work in all the other stuff i'd done essays on in class like the media and the poor US administration. my basic argument was that the vietcong's passion and ambition in their struggle was important but so were the deficiences in the US effort. i was pretty happy with it overall. hurrah!!! no more modern! ho chi minh can kiss my shapely white derriere!!!!

 

[Trigger189]

i loved this section! im sure this will be my highest mark. the other sections were alright too, but I find Indochina more easy to talk about.. and Craig.. talked about the exact same things as you. It was a good question - could basically talk about anything - US tactics, Tet offensive, My Lai, anti-war movement, Nixon, Johnson, media.. great!

 

[raidan]

yea i thought this was by far the easiest section

 

[gemita]

Yeah not too bad at all...I did the first one on Geneva, which I think puts me in the minority. I wasn't able to write that much (probably because I only left myself half an hour to do it in) but I think I covered all the main points -
-North Vietnam wasn't interested in spreading communism so much as nationalism, that was the motivating factor
-Cold war context etc, meant that US disregarded Geneva, didn't sign the accords and interfered with the 1955 elections.
-Infiltration along the Ho Chi Minh trail mean that the troops out within 300 days clause was ignored
-The aim of the North Vietnamese was to unite the country so this was a factor in the failure of the agreement because the ideological motivation was so strong.
Think that's about it...anyone else do this question?

 

[Trigger189]

yikes... no way..

 

[gemita]

Please tell me that yikes was not in reaction to my essay 'plan'????

 

[Trigger189]

no way... yikes, no way id do that question - from the stuff u listed, i would not have been able to write that much. I was very happy with the seccond question

 

[Craig]

and Craig.. talked about the exact same things as you. It was a good question - could basically talk about anything - US tactics, Tet offensive, My Lai, anti-war movement, Nixon, Johnson, media.. great!

It's so comforting to hear someone did something similar

 

[joe123]

In my view this was by far the best section. I did the second question and it was great. I made the link between the Vietcong, the role of the media and how it led to the anti war movement, which then shaped Nixon's three policies of vietnamisation, peace talks and the madman theory.
I also wrote a fair bit about the TET offensive, and the Mai Lai massacre and what it showed.

the second part was so much better for me ... by the way the viet cong failed to exist after Tet ... the NVA took over control in the south after that but i rekon if u meantion all the points about tet, media, LBJ and the rest of it , you'll be all sweet

 

[sneeble]

I did the first one, I disagreed with the view (who wouldn't), and said it was a combination of factors:

Larger context of the cold war; US support for Diem & China/Soviet support for Ho
American policy; containment, domino theory, etc
Diem declaring no elections would take place
Diem persecuting buddhists, etc gave them a reason to join the North

Plus a bit of misc crap, you know, those paragraphs at the end where you think you're heading for some grand, killer point but it just doesn't come together.

My last exam It's all over!

 

[raidan]

yea i thought this was by far the easiest section

quoting my own post so i dont look like a gloater

despite the fact that i did find indochina easy, i had difficulty with core topic and i didnt write very much for albert speer part ii) or the germany question

but its quality over quantity so... i guess anyones outcome is definantly open to speculation

just dont go on about how easy u thought everything was, although u may not realise it at the time, your coming across as a real uppedy mofo, and your making other poeple whos history may not be their strong point feel bad

( that last bit is not aimed at anyone in particular, just take it to heart )

 

[WaltzinDarkness]

It's so comforting to hear someone did something similar

Oooh thats what I thought when I read what you wrote lol

btw nice sig!

I read the questions and panicked and left it to the end then realized it was probably the better section lol

 

[Craig]

the second part was so much better for me ... by the way the viet cong failed to exist after Tet ... the NVA took over control in the south after that but i rekon if u meantion all the points about tet, media, LBJ and the rest of it , you'll be all sweet

Ah nice work, you know your information well.
I actually used TET in my media paragraph, in which I explained the images of enemy soldiers in the US embassy and what effect that had. I didn't exactly link it to the actions of the Viet Cong. It was a bit of a play of words that saved me there.

 

[gordo]

i did question 1 and talked about how america's drive for economic supremacy meant they took all measures to prevent the north from infilitrating the south

 

[max]

I drifted off in the midst of writing about Kennedy's policies, then woke up a short time later realising I had written a p'g on Strategic Hamlets... in my sleep.

It sounded a'right.

 

[chocc0]

i was proud that i was able to use historiography that i actually knew unlike in germany where i made it up!