Competing Interpretations of the Vietnam War

The Vietnam War has been analyzed through two primary schools of thought: the Orthodox and the Revisionist perspectives. The Orthodox view asserts that the war was not necessary for protecting American interests and that it was unwinnable. In contrast, the Revisionists argue that the war was strategically necessary and could have been won with different military strategies or more effective counterinsurgency tactics. These competing narratives highlight the deep divides in understanding the war's objectives and outcomes, influencing debates about national security and American identity.