Comments on: Gulf of Tonkin Incident

Question: Gulf of Tonkin Incident

Kwantsar — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:21:38 -0800

Is it widely accepted that The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was an outright fabrication?

By: caddis

caddis — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:40:41 -0800

While the US Navy now admits that the second attack never occurred, I do not think we can know for sure what really happened. My money is on the mistaken, nervous sailor theory rather than on the deliberate fabrication theory.

By: matteo

matteo — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:48:07 -0800

check out Beschloss' book:

In any event, Johnson made his choice and he stuck to it, the evidence be damned. These tapes reveal, for the first time, that he understood--as Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara apparently did not--that not very much had happened in the Gulf of Tonkin on August 4, 1964, and that the resolution he secured from Congress giving him the authority to wage war in Vietnam had been secured on the basis of false evidence. Johnson blames the generals and admirals for leading him astray, in his own inimitable language:
I don't want them just being some change o'life woman running up and saying that, by God, she was being raped just because a man walks in the room! And that looks to me like that's what happens in the thirty years that I've been watching them. A man gets enough braid on him, and he walks in a room and he just immediately concludes that he's being attacked.

Cute, but the truth is that on that fateful summer day, the military was a great deal more circumspect about the imaginary attack on the USS Turner Joy and the Maddox than were Johnson and McNamara. Both men exerted tremendous pressure down through the chain of command to confirm the nonexistent attack so that Johnson could announce a U.S. retaliation in time to make the news that night--a bit of unforgivable moral expediency that may have resulted in U.S. pilots being downed over Vietnam. Earlier that day, Johnson had falsely informed congressional leaders: "Some of our boys are floating around in the water."

The news that no such attack had occurred may have prevented Johnson from responding to another Gulf of Tonkin incident six weeks after the big one, but it does not seem to have affected Johnson's judgment about the wisdom of the war or the constitutional basis for its conduct.

By: caddis

caddis — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:58:53 -0800

Another good article with lots of detail.

By: purephase

purephase — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:50:40 -0800

Quote from the Pentagon papers:
"... public opinion on our Southeast Asia policy was badly divided in the United States at the moment and that, therefore, the President needed an affirmation of support."

According to Zinn, the Maddox (one of the key ships in the affair) was not on a routine patrol in international waters as the administration contended, it was actually on a "special electronic spying mission" in Vietnamese territorial waters.

The Tonkin incident (and the as-named resolution) gave the President the ability to declare war without Congressional approval.

The Wikipedia entry is a pretty good source of information.

By: jacobsee

jacobsee — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:54:02 -0800

McNamara talks about this a bit in The Fog of War. I forget the nuance but his answer to your question would be no.