Welcome to Westonci.ca, where curiosity meets expertise. Ask any question and receive fast, accurate answers from our knowledgeable community. Connect with a community of experts ready to help you find solutions to your questions quickly and accurately. Explore comprehensive solutions to your questions from a wide range of professionals on our user-friendly platform.

Vietnam War Veteran Karl Marlantes said, "That changed our whole attitude toward government. Up until then, the president wouldn’t lie. After then, they always lie." Do you think this is a fair assessment? Why or why not?

Sagot :

This is not a fair assessment because it is a generalization about the other presidents due to an event that happened a long time ago and that does not involve them.

The Vietnam War was a warlike confrontation that occurred in the territory of Vietnam in which two sides faced each other. On one side were the North Vietnamese who had a Communist ideology, while the South Vietnamese had a Capitalist ideology.

This confrontation involved several foreign countries such as the Soviet Union and the United States. In the case of the United States, many American citizens rejected the idea of ​​involving the country in an alien confrontation because it had not affected American interests.

The president of the United States did not take into account citizen requests not to get involved in this confrontation and lied to be able to get involved in it. From that moment the credibility of the government is lower.

The credibility of the next government was also affected because now citizens believe that the rulers are lying. This conception is wrong and unfair because the management of all the presidents and public servants cannot be generalized due to the wrong action of one of them.

Therefore, I believe that it is not a fair evaluation that is expressed by the war veteran Karl Marlantes because he is generalizing about all the rulers because of what one of them has done.

Learn more in: https://brainly.com/question/11375126?