Lyndon B Johnson Beyond Vietnam Speech Analysis

During 1967 two men had made compelling speeches on whether the war in Vietnam was necessary, unnecessary, justifiable or unjustice. On September twenty-ninth 1967 Lyndon B. Johnson gave his speech insisting that the war in Vietnam was completely necessary for the safety and survival of not only the United States of America but the adjacent lands of Vietnam as well. Johnson's speech also supported the belief that if South Vietnam was lost to the communists it would greatly increase the chances of a world war three. April fourth 1967 Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “Beyond Vietnam” speech to the “Clergy and Laymen Concerned about Vietnam, at the Riverside Church” expressing his concerns about the unnecessary needs of sending troops to

King’s speech because he shows supportive evidence to why it was necessary for the United States to fight in the Vietnam war. In Johnson’s speech the question at hand was, “ Is the aggression a threat-not only to the immediate victim- but to the United States of America and peace and security of the entire world of which we in America are a very vital part?” The United States Senate answered this question with a vote of eighty-two to one which led the SEATO treaty into effect in 1955. In 1964 the United states Congress felt it was still necessary to be fighting in Vietnam by voting 504 to 2. In 1965 another poll was ran however, it was a public poll this time. According to the book “Debating Vietnam” the poll took place in November and it showed support for the war had risen from fifty-two percent to sixty-four percent since may that year (Fry, Joseph A. Debating Vietnam). The public was also asked if the United States should keep fighting in Vietnam while trying to negotiate or if it was best to back off and then negotiate. Seventy-one percent of the public that was asked this question said the United States should keep fighting while negotiating ( Fry, Joseph A. Debating Vietnam). A public poll showed Sixty-one percent said to bomb all of Vietnam if they refused to negotiate at all. While another poll also showed that fifty-eight percent believed that increasing the use of bombs would more likely come to a peaceful agreement in Vietnam, only twenty-one percent believed it would do more harm ( Fry, Joseph A. Debating Vietnam). This supportive evidence is important to provide because it give the public facts to rely on. Supporters of Dr. King may say he has supportive evidence because he works with the community in the neighborhoods where the troops are being drafted from. Dr. King says “My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettos of the north”.