Imagine you are an advisor for a sitting us president. you have just received word that three small boats appear to have attacked a us port. the president wants to retaliate, but you think more evidence is needed before us forces attack. what historical event could you reference to support your case best?

Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Explanation:

Many conspiracy theories say that the United States forged documents and information to declare war on Iraq. These theories are criticized by many for not being sufficient evidence that it could actually have happened, at the same time their advocates say the existence of chemical weapons has never been proven and the prosecution was merely a situation created for Iraq to be attacked. . What few people know is that the entry of the United States into the Vietnam War, which caused the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, was the result of a situation that was not fully invented, but was greatly increased to give the conditions of the United States Congress to authorize military action.

The event that went down in history as the Gulf of Tonkin incident is also known as the USS Maddox incident, because that was the name of the American destroyer who was on a surveillance and spying mission off the coast of North Vietnam on February 2. August 1964. On that date, the destroyer entered the territorial waters of North Vietnam, such act motivated the attack of 3 torpedo boats of the North Vietnamese navy. Due to technological superiority, the American ship eventually damaged two of the speedboats. The North Vietnamese government quickly stated that the US ship was in its territorial waters and that for this reason only the destroyer was attacked.

Over the years many suspicions have been raised about the actual existence of North Vietnamese torpedo boats launching against American ships. This theme turned out to be the subject of a conspiracy theory, with many people defending the truth of history and many condemning military action and saying that it was all an invention. For this reason, as you consulted with the president, you could use this incident to remind him of the need for sufficient evidence before deciding to act in retaliation.

just need the points

explanation:

a standing committee

explanation: