ome would be better for America can still be questioned. In the end America lost the war against Vietnam. At that time, it wasnt Nixon who was president of America, it was Ford. He was very much against the use of military force whatsoever. When North Vietnam violated the Paris Peace Accords, South Vietnam actually counted on the help which America had promised to give when they signed the Accord. Ford denied them of this help and thereby gave North Vietnam an easy victory. The difference between the two presidents was that Ford believed in what the public thought, whereas Nixon didnt. Ford did what Nixon didnt do, listen to the public. This however proved not to be very effective. During Nixons presidency, a Peace Accord had been signed. Nixon achieved this by using force, force which the public was against. When he started with the use of force, the public became angry, it wasnt only Nixon who made them angry, but warweariness. Even though Nixon wasnt the type of president to listen to what the public had to say, when the end of the war stayed out, it was impossible for him to ignore the publics demands entirely. During his second term as president he had for the second time promised a quick end to the war, this time he was determined to keep his promise. It was time for concessions, there came peace, but not with honour. If he hadnt made these concessions and went on with fighting till the end, the war might have taken a lot longer, but eventually America had to be able to hit North Vietnams breaking point. Nixon however never got a chance to get that far. Nixon used the military in a way that not many other presidents would dare. Was it better to use force than settle things peacefully? The problem is, North Vietnam wouldnt allow the war to be settled peacefully in any other way than under their terms. This would be unexceptable for any president. Nixon was almost forced to use the military against Vietnam. He had high aims, he thou...
