Role of domestic concerns in us withdrawal from vietnam Essay

Role of domestic concerns in us withdrawal from vietnam - Essay Example After analyzing these questions, we can finally land on our ultimate target that was to investigate the extent to which the domestic concerns played their part in the withdrawal of the United States of America. As rightly quoted by Jose Padilla, war is not really something at the sole discretion of the president, rather it is the public power that should ultimately shape the foreign policy of a nation, or more precisely, the fate and destiny of the nation. This thought truly reflects in the US Vietnam war. This war proved that it's the public, the common man of the nation, who will decide the foreign policy of the nation. The history recorded that the people protesting on the roads of New York or the colleges of Ohio forced the think tanks at Pentagon and Whitehouse to change their policy and finally withdraw from the tiresome and simply lost battle of Vietnam, that proved to be the graveyard for the human and the monetary resources of American nation. Almost all the historians do agree to the fact that domestic concerns forced the US Think Tank to finally decide to withdraw from the battle at Vietnam. However, the perception of the extent to which the internal factors played their role in that historical decision is different for different historians. Furthermore, the recorded evidences also tell that the ratio of favour for the war also differed from time to time, even during the war period and age group to age group as well. 2 The Vietnam War, which lasted in 1975 is also known as Indochina war, the American war in Vietnam and the Vietnam Conflict. Why did the United States of America tried to involve in the Vietnam If looked from a narrow perspective, it seems that this was just a conflict between the communist and the non-communist factions of the Vietnamese nation. However, when we take into account the entire global scenario at that time, especially that of post-world war and cold war, we tend to realize that it was not an ordinary civil war, rather a contest between the two opposing super powers of the time, both the powers claiming to be the super power but propagating entirely different ideologies of economics, religion and state governance. Thus it was a war between the communism and the socialism, the United States of America, along with its capitalist allies and the South Vietnam on one side and the Soviet Union, its allies, the People's Republic of China, and North Vietnam on the other. Thus, withdrawing from war does not only mean the inability to handle some civil war, had it been the case, United States of America would have left the battle far earlier than it did, but this withdra wal would probably have been seen by the United States of America's policy makers as the surrender to the communist alliance. This may well be attributed to the reluctance of the United States' think tank to withdraw at an earlier stage. What approach for the involvement was there in the mind of the military and political leadership of the United States of America Since this was not too long that the Second World War had ended, those American and other nations, who had witnessed the disastrous effects of war were still alive. Any war in any part of the world is thus supposed to get a furious reaction of the public. Specially when it comes to the war in United States of

Plea-bargaining Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Plea-bargaining - Essay Example The advantage of this system is that there is no need for a trial, a right that the defendant waives losing the chance for acquittal. However, the defendant â€Å"escapes† with a lesser charge than would have been the case had trial been done. The state saves on the cost of conducting a trial (Grossman & Katz, 1983). For the system to be operational, there are issues that are pre-negotiated including the reduction of charges, recommendations regarding the sentence itself or the guarantee that the prosecution would not oppose a request for probation. The process of plea-bargaining after the crime is committed and the accused person is arrested. The accused pleads guilty in exchange of an agreed sentence recommended by the judge. There are three types of pleas bargains. These are charge bargaining, count bargaining and sentence bargaining. The first type of bargain is where the defendant agrees to plead to a charge that is lesser than the one he is charged with. The second is wh ere the defendant will have the number of charges that he faces reduced in number and the third is where the defendant simply pleads guilty with prior knowledge of what the sentence will be. The process of plea bargaining is a private matter where only the accused, the defendant counsel, the prosecutor and in some cases the judge may be in attendance. The offer of plea bargain is used to locate stolen goods, to help arrest other culprits or to know the location of a kidnapped victim or a killed individual. A plea bargain does not undermine the system of law. Although the facts indicate that the practice usually leads to reduced sentences to guilty parties without the process of trial, there are benefits that aid in offsetting the negative sentiments expressed in relation to the practice. There are many advantages to plea bargaining as there are disadvantages. Considering the success rates of plea bargaining compared to that of trials, the practice inadvertently aids in the reduction of criminals on the streets as well as guarantee speedy dispensation of justice (Goldstein, 1997). In exchange, the prosecution gets information that might be valuable to the conviction of more serious crimes or may get information that might be the missing link towards the conclusion of a case in a court or an investigation. There are instances where plea bargaining has been considered as lacking. The prisoner?s dilemma scenario plays out during plea bargains (Schulhofer, 1992). Consider two people who have been accused. The prosecution will attempt to unearth the facts of the case by offering a plea bargain to one party so that he can testify against the other party. Regardless of whether both parties are guilty or not, the person who confesses will give false information incriminating even those who may not be guilty in an attempt to get himself out of the larger sentence. Another scenario is when the defendant cannot raise bail. Such a defendant will plead guilty to the charges leveled against him regardless of whether he is guilty or not. Such a person considers the length of time that trials usually take and chooses to plead to a plea bargain that might present a lesser time than that which he would have faced awaiting trial. Some critics argue that plea bargaining does not always result in saving on costs (Kipnis, 1979). They consider that a prosecutor who has a remote chance of getting a conviction may enter a plea bargain with the aim of getting reduced time for the defendant. If such a defendant accepts the deal, he will increase the cost to the state as he will be catered for in a jail. On the contrary, if the trial had dragged on until the end, the defendant would have been acquitted and that would have carried no extra cost to the state. There are