Fog Of War Video Analysis Essay PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay Analysis on the documentary Fog of War ...

Description

Fog of War Video Analysis Essay This documentary was very interesting to watch, I really liked Robert McNamara’s stories about his time as National Security Advisor to Kennedy and Johnson. I was shocked to hear about the multiple attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro under the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson administrations. I didn’t understand the point in bombing innocent civilians in Japan. Out of all the videos we watched this semester that has been an ongoing question for me. Why do we tend to murder innocent civilians instead of doing soldier to soldier combat? Another question arose for me while watching the video: why do we set out to completely destroy each other in war? Is the conflict really that serious that we have to kill so many innocent people? An interesting statement in the video “immoral if you lose, but not if you win” because, that mindset seems to not have a sense of humanity. I feel that one should feel bad either way because, it is immoral to kill so many innocent others. Another thing that surprised me was that McNamara worked for the Ford company before working for Kennedy. I have to commend McNamara for giving up his job as President of the Ford Company to become a National Security Advisor. Another thing that stood out to me in the video was when McNamara discussed the death of John F. Kennedy. I could tell that Kennedy’s death was a tragic moment for McNamara because, he was so emotional discussing that rough time in his life. I thought it was ironic that Kennedy visited the Arlington Cemetery and admired how nice it looked only to die a week later. Another statement that stood out to me was “we see what we want to believe” because, I believe that sometimes applies to our everyday lives. Especially in politics we

see what we want to believe. The conversation McNamara had with the former Prime Minister of Vietnam was interesting. McNamara finding out that both U.S. and Vietnam had very different notions about each other was very interesting. It made me wonder if we actually had conversations with countries we run into conflict with would tensions even exist. I agree with McNamara when he said “war is cruelty” because, over the years war has only to be proven as cruelty to others. Wars have not solved conflicts because, it created many problems. Overall the video was very interesting I would like to see a biographical movie on McNamara’s life. Chapter 17 discussed the security dilemma which is when one is trying to make everything secure by increasing military only leading to more problems. Lyndon B. Johnson wanted to send in more marines to Vietnam but, McNamara insured him that would only make matters worse between the United States and Vietnam. As the war went on in Vietnam there was increase of the need for more soldiers. The chapter also discussed national identity conception which is theory that explains why some countries use nuclear weapons and some don’t. United States went nuclear to only prepare for other countries that could potentially use nuclear force as well. The chapter also discussed the transcendent identity which is an us vs. them mentality. The United States had a us vs. them mentality when we decided to bomb innocent people in Japan and, when we decided to destroy Vietnam. Chapter 17 also brings up a good point which states “wars are generally over when each side believes it is likely to win but, if they were truly rational states they would access their own power and thus agree not to fight”. If the United States and Vietnam did this there would be no war. McNamara would have not had the trouble of going to war in Vietnam.

Chapter 8 on Personality and Beliefs discussed the 5 major factor of leadership style. In the video McNamara described Kennedy and Johnson and their different leadership skills. Both Kennedy and Johnson were involved in the policy making process to decide to go to war in Vietnam. Kennedy and Johnson had a willingness to tolerate conflict in Vietnam because, they both keep a level head in deciding the day to day decisions in the Vietnam War. They both stuck to their motivation for leading which was the best for the American people. Kennedy preferred strategies on reasoning the conflicts in Vietnam. Both Kennedy and Johnson displayed the 5 major factors in leadership style. Cottam Chapter 4 discussed conformity in groups which refers to the tendency to change one’s belief or behavior so they are consistent with the standards set by the group. There were multiple times that McNamara had to conform to the President’s decision making when it came to Vietnam. Even though he warned them about the threats Vietnam the President did what they wanted to do. Cottam Chapter 2 talked about the 5 big personality traits in a leader, in the video McNamara’s personality fit into all 5 of these either on the high or low spectrum. McNamara is low in neuroticism which is when one is calm and secure. He seemed to be very calm and secure when speaking to the President during that time. Robert was high in extraversion which is sociable, optimistic, and affectionate. McNamara was very loved by some of his peers and, he cared about both presidents he worked under Kennedy and Johnson. McNamara was very high in openness which means to be creative and show many interests. He was very creative and showed many interests at the ideas about how to deal with the conflicts in Vietnam. He showed the characteristic of agreeableness because, McNamara was very trustworthy, and helpful. Robert also showed the personality trait of conscientiousness because he was organized, hardworking, and relatable.

-Kionte Stewart...