Abstract

Over time, the involvement that the United States had in the War on Communism and the War on Terror has been heavily debated. The presidential decisions that were made were self-motivating, serving a chase for power. Throughout the span of multiple presidents, extended involvement became a topic of conversation, driving the United States into a darker time economically and dividing the nation. There was little justification given to the reasoning behind a continued presence overseas in Vietnam, Korea, the U.S.S.R., and the Middle East. The presidential decisions that were made to extend involvement had self-motivating agendas behind them, searching for recognition. Truman, Nixon, Kennedy, Johnson, Trump, Obama, Bush, and Ford are all discussed as the center of the extended involvement in their respective wars and time frames. Across party lines were decisions detrimental to the United States nation and citizens. Troops received dismal treatment and support, with many topics blatantly ignored by the government. History repeats itself and draws many parallels between these two wars, leading many to wonder whether extended involvement was necessary. The United States should not have seen extended involvement. Weak justification can be given for the involvement it saw and no positive outcomes come to light.

Semester/Year of Award

Spring 2018

Mentor

Chris Neumann

Department/Professional Affiliation

Department of English

Access Options

Restricted Access Thesis

Degree Name

Honors Scholars

Department

Music

Share

COinS