The Post American World

[Zorro]

Will the real legacy of George Bush be the end of American influence on world events?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/135380

[jauble]

no

[sailor]

7 pages? not even yerdaddy would get away with that crap.

from the 1st page (can't be bothered reading further) he seems to think there's malaise here because we don't have the world's tallest building or biggest mall or largest ferris wheel. who needs that type of meaningless crap?

[Team_Ramrod]

His legacy won't be 'the guy who ended America's influence(s) on the world'.... It will just be the end of an 8 year period that you guys will have to work hard to recover from for many years.

If anything, America will become stronger because you all will have to unite to overcome the great Bush era.

I'm sorry, I shouldn't say anything.... We just went through the Chrétien era.

[scottinnj]

the biggest movie industry is Bollywood, not Hollywood

Bollywood? Has this guy seen the crap that comes out of Bollywood? Crappy spy movies with dance scenes involving the whole cast for no reason at all-usually a dream sequence for the girl- and Chinese fireworks for special effects. NAUSEATING!

[Zorro]

Bollywood? Has this guy seen the crap that comes out of Bollywood? Crappy spy movies with dance scenes involving the whole cast for no reason at all-usually a dream sequence for the girl- and Chinese fireworks for special effects. NAUSEATING!

all I can say in Bollywood's defense is "Wild Hogs"

[TheMojoPin]

Bollywood? Has this guy seen the crap that comes out of Bollywood? Crappy spy movies with dance scenes involving the whole cast for no reason at all-usually a dream sequence for the girl- and Chinese fireworks for special effects. NAUSEATING!

Sorry, Bollywood wins:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6yS9AtFgWmE&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6yS9AtFgWmE&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ygeBEOgdAII&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ygeBEOgdAII&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[scottinnj]

I didn't know Indians had Leprechauns too? Those video clips are just way beyond my realm of sanity.

[booster11373]

Ive been thinking of this the last few days.

What the hell do we have to be proud at least in my 35 years as an American all the policy of recent Government are shit

Educational policy is a mishmash of programs that are not sustainable

Agricultural policy is subsidizing the obesity problem

There is no Energy policy that makes any sence whats so ever

Health care is a ticking time bomb for my generation

Economic policy is just let big corporations do what they please and pass the bill for any clean ups to the tax payer


Each one of these so called policies could have pages and pages written about them


Just because we spend the most on defence does not make us number 1

We suck, learn Chinese or Indian

[ShowerBench]

Will the real legacy of George Bush be the end of American influence on world events?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/135380

You can't end the influence on world events by the country with the most powerful weapons arsenal in the world no matter how hard you try, and Bush has tried harder than anyone.

You can change the nature of the influence by how you balance that arsenal with diplomacy.

[Ogre]

What I don't get is that the International community has crticized us for years for having to have the "biggest" of everything. Criticized for our greed and gluttony. Now we do not have the biggest mall or largest ferris wheel and that is a bad thing? This "journalist" simply has an agenda, like many in this world. They hate America. Many hate the current President and "his" policies. As far as Presidential policies go look at LBJ and Nixon, Carter and Ford. They all institued policies foriegn and domestic that satisfied the special interests of the groups that supported them. Bush I was an extension of Reagan. Clinton helped bring us NAFTA and the telecommuncations act. It goes on and on and on. We have become a bunch of self loathing pussies that are so ready to point a finger at someone and something else for our ills. I say suck it up and take our medicine. The only way out of this mess is through it. I seriously doubt the Great Savior Obama or McCain will be any different. What makes this country great is that unlike China or India you will not be castrated for your opinion, yet many are ready to concede that those countries are "leading the way" in many aspects of trade and culture. I say if you are in such awe of these emerging superpowers, learn Chinese and move there. I am sick of people spitting on America just because they can without fear of repercussion. Why do not all the self haters move out so we can make room for more Illegal immigrants that we are too PC to stand up to.

OK I know it's coming so all you intellectual interenet tough guys hammer away. I will be waiting.:bye:

[TheMojoPin]

What I don't get is that the International community has crticized us for years for having to have the "biggest" of everything. Criticized for our greed and gluttony. Now we do not have the biggest mall or largest ferris wheel and that is a bad thing? This "journalist" simply has an agenda, like many in this world. They hate America. Many hate the current President and "his" policies. As far as Presidential policies go look at LBJ and Nixon, Carter and Ford. They all institued policies foriegn and domestic that satisfied the special interests of the groups that supported them. Bush I was an extension of Reagan. Clinton helped bring us NAFTA and the telecommuncations act. It goes on and on and on. We have become a bunch of self loathing pussies that are so ready to point a finger at someone and something else for our ills. I say suck it up and take our medicine. The only way out of this mess is through it. I seriously doubt the Great Savior Obama or McCain will be any different. What makes this country great is that unlike China or India you will not be castrated for your opinion, yet many are ready to concede that those countries are "leading the way" in many aspects of trade and culture. I say if you are in such awe of these emerging superpowers, learn Chinese and move there. I am sick of people spitting on America just because they can without fear of repercussion. Why do not all the self haters move out so we can make room for more Illegal immigrants that we are too PC to stand up to.

OK I know it's coming so all you intellectual interenet tough guys hammer away. I will be waiting.:bye:

What is there to "hammer?" None of that makes any sense.

[Dougie Brootal]

i hate 'too smart/cool for teh interwebz guy'

[booster11373]

What I don't get is that the International community has crticized us for years for having to have the "biggest" of everything. Criticized for our greed and gluttony. Now we do not have the biggest mall or largest ferris wheel and that is a bad thing? This "journalist" simply has an agenda, like many in this world. They hate America. Many hate the current President and "his" policies. As far as Presidential policies go look at LBJ and Nixon, Carter and Ford. They all institued policies foriegn and domestic that satisfied the special interests of the groups that supported them. Bush I was an extension of Reagan. Clinton helped bring us NAFTA and the telecommuncations act. It goes on and on and on. We have become a bunch of self loathing pussies that are so ready to point a finger at someone and something else for our ills. I say suck it up and take our medicine. The only way out of this mess is through it. I seriously doubt the Great Savior Obama or McCain will be any different. What makes this country great is that unlike China or India you will not be castrated for your opinion, yet many are ready to concede that those countries are "leading the way" in many aspects of trade and culture. I say if you are in such awe of these emerging superpowers, learn Chinese and move there. I am sick of people spitting on America just because they can without fear of repercussion. Why do not all the self haters move out so we can make room for more Illegal immigrants that we are too PC to stand up to.

OK I know it's coming so all you intellectual interenet tough guys hammer away. I will be waiting.:bye:

thats another problem with most Americans the "Love it or leave it" attitude is utter jingoism bs that just perputuates the problem

[Ogre]

I never said love it or leave it. I was trying to explain that we just did not get here in the last decade or so. I knew as I was typing the first response that the "I am smarter than everyone else crowd" would say poo poo. Too bad that free speech is what evryone cries for except when it goes against what ypu believe. Then it is moronic or "makes no sense". That is one problem with the superdelegate system. There are people out there that think thier vote or opinion matters more than others. Tell me how that is. Explain to me how one citizens vote counts for more than another's ? It's the system. Democrats are bought and sold just like Republicans. Granted this President and his administration have screwed things up in fine fashion over the past eight years, but it began way way way before then.

[booster11373]

I never said love it or leave it. I was trying to explain that we just did not get here in the last decade or so. I knew as I was typing the first response that the "I am smarter than everyone else crowd" would say poo poo. Too bad that free speech is what evryone cries for except when it goes against what ypu believe. Then it is moronic or "makes no sense". That is one problem with the superdelegate system. There are people out there that think thier vote or opinion matters more than others. Tell me how that is. Explain to me how one citizens vote counts for more than another's ? It's the system. Democrats are bought and sold just like Republicans. Granted this President and his administration have screwed things up in fine fashion over the past eight years, but it began way way way before then.

from your above responce

I say if you are in such awe of these emerging superpowers, learn Chinese and move there. I am sick of people spitting on America just because they can without fear of repercussion. Why do not all the self haters move out so we can make room for more Illegal immigrants that we are too PC to stand up to.

Im not looking for a fight and you are entitled to your opinion just like me

[TheMojoPin]

I never said love it or leave it. I was trying to explain that we just did not get here in the last decade or so. I knew as I was typing the first response that the "I am smarter than everyone else crowd" would say poo poo. Too bad that free speech is what evryone cries for except when it goes against what ypu believe. Then it is moronic or "makes no sense".

Or people say it makes no sense because it doesn't make any sense.

It really doesn't. You talk about questionable journlism, "special interest groups," and then random presidents and government spending programs, then being PC, then being castrated, then immigration.

Was it supposed to just be bunch of random, vague statements not strung together at all into any kind of a point?

[Ogre]

I guess I did say it in not so many words....apologies on that one. It is not exactly what I meant. It's just why do we as a country hate ourselves so much? why do we just try to spin and shift blame instead of owning up to the fact that Washington is a swamp that traded malaria for politics ? They are ALL dirty liars that will say and do anything to gain and retain power. It will come to a point that the special interest groups on both sides will tear us apart. I guess that is why I get so angry.

[Devo37]

USA!!! USA!!! USA!!!

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c395/Devo37/hacksaw_duggan.jpg

[booster11373]

I guess I did say it in not so many words....apologies on that one. It is not exactly what I meant. It's just why do we as a country hate ourselves so much? why do we just try to spin and shift blame instead of owning up to the fact that Washington is a swamp that traded malaria for politics ? They are ALL dirty liars that will say and do anything to gain and retain power. It will come to a point that the special interest groups on both sides will tear us apart. I guess that is why I get so angry.

Im with you on the anger part man Im angry at the system as well

[Ogre]

Or people say it makes no sense because it doesn't make any sense.

It really doesn't. You talk about questionable journlism, "special interest groups," and then random presidents and government spending programs, then being PC, then being castrated, then immigration.

Was it supposed to just be bunch of random, vague statements not strung together at all into any kind of a point?

No It was not. My attempted point was that people act like that this all just happened in the last decade or so. That it is solely at the hands of Republicans that this country is in the shape that it is in. This long slide into being so disliked as a country began before they killed JFK to drag us into another unpopular and meaningless war. Vietnam. Nixon ran on the pledge to get us out of there and that took much much longer than promised. Why ? MONEY. War is big business that is usually started over resource rich areas and political ideaology.

I just grow weary of the lies and broken promises on both sides.

My father served in Korea. I served in the first Gulf War and my son is in Okinawa in route to Afghanistan. We were/are just pawns trying to do the right thing for a country that I do not even recognize anymore.

Mojo you're right I am rambling and probably making no sense...sober as a judge, but making zero sense right now. Just a crazy bitter middle aged man. Where are my guns and religion, I need something to cling to.

I feel like we are all getting set up for more lies with no end in sight.

Bollywood....BAAHHH

[scottinnj]

America is the greatest country in the history of man. I know a lot of you will roll your eyes at that, but I'm talking about what we have accomplished in our relatively short amount of time as being a country. We may not have the most beautiful country, or the best wine, beer, food or transportation system, but here is what we have accomplished:

Established a government that is accountable to the people, not the upper class of America.

We have always had an orderly change of leadership in Congress and the White House. No Coups or interruptions of orderly management of government by Parliamentry votes of "no confidence" like other modern forms of democratic government.

Our country is responsible for more free people around the world, and our presence in two world wars ensured that the world would not fall into the hands of Nazi Fascism (WWII) or a German Monarchy (WWI)

Having said that, even the best governments end, as did the Greeks and the Roman Republic.

If we are to slip away from being the superpower of the world, I don't know what short term problems that will cause us. But being a superpower does not define our existence. Prior to WWII, we were not a superpower. We were tired of war, and did not want to enter WWII, although our alliance with France and England was obviously the right thing to do.

If we concentrate on the Monroe Doctrine, and worry about our hemisphere and let the European Union worry about their hemisphere, we will remain strong and be able to protect ourselves from threats abroad. We don't need to be the cops of the world anymore. The rest of the world has a bias against us, not just because of Bush's doctrine, but the fact that the United States is the problem solver, for better or worse, while the U.N. hems and haws at crises that pop up around the world.

But I could be wrong about that. I just don't worry about it. I remember my history book telling me that some of our most prosperous times did not involve our having fingerprints around the world.

[meanmrbill]

What I don't get is that the International community has crticized us for years for having to have the "biggest" of everything. Criticized for our greed and gluttony. Now we do not have the biggest mall or largest ferris wheel and that is a bad thing? This "journalist" simply has an agenda, like many in this world. They hate America. Many hate the current President and "his" policies. As far as Presidential policies go look at LBJ and Nixon, Carter and Ford. They all institued policies foriegn and domestic that satisfied the special interests of the groups that supported them. Bush I was an extension of Reagan. Clinton helped bring us NAFTA and the telecommuncations act. It goes on and on and on. We have become a bunch of self loathing pussies that are so ready to point a finger at someone and something else for our ills. I say suck it up and take our medicine. The only way out of this mess is through it. I seriously doubt the Great Savior Obama or McCain will be any different. What makes this country great is that unlike China or India you will not be castrated for your opinion, yet many are ready to concede that those countries are "leading the way" in many aspects of trade and culture. I say if you are in such awe of these emerging superpowers, learn Chinese and move there. I am sick of people spitting on America just because they can without fear of repercussion. Why do not all the self haters move out so we can make room for more Illegal immigrants that we are too PC to stand up to.

OK I know it's coming so all you intellectual interenet tough guys hammer away. I will be waiting.:bye:

hahaha.......this post should be the new preamble to the constitution. Brilliant. I always wondered what happened to Walter Sobchak.

[TheMojoPin]

This long slide into being so disliked as a country began before they killed JFK to drag us into another unpopular and meaningless war. Vietnam.

We were involved militarily in Vietnam well before JFK ever took office. JFK continued the escalation of our involvement there during his time in office. The killing of JFK had zero to do with "getting us into Vietnam."

Part of my confusion of what you're posting stems from statements like this one. Your historical breakdowns are all over the place and consist too much of generalizations and inaccuracies.

[Devo37]

America is the greatest country in the history of man. I know a lot of you will roll your eyes at that, but I'm talking about what we have accomplished in our relatively short amount of time as being a country. We may not have the most beautiful country, or the best wine, beer, food or transportation system, but here is what we have accomplished:

Established a government that is accountable to the people, not the upper class of America.

We have always had an orderly change of leadership in Congress and the White House. No Coups or interruptions of orderly management of government by Parliamentry votes of "no confidence" like other modern forms of democratic government.

Our country is responsible for more free people around the world, and our presence in two world wars ensured that the world would not fall into the hands of Nazi Fascism (WWII) or a German Monarchy (WWI)

Having said that, even the best governments end, as did the Greeks and the Roman Republic.

If we are to slip away from being the superpower of the world, I don't know what short term problems that will cause us. But being a superpower does not define our existence. Prior to WWII, we were not a superpower. We were tired of war, and did not want to enter WWII, although our alliance with France and England was obviously the right thing to do.

If we concentrate on the Monroe Doctrine, and worry about our hemisphere and let the European Union worry about their hemisphere, we will remain strong and be able to protect ourselves from threats abroad. We don't need to be the cops of the world anymore. The rest of the world has a bias against us, not just because of Bush's doctrine, but the fact that the United States is the problem solver, for better or worse, while the U.N. hems and haws at crises that pop up around the world.

But I could be wrong about that. I just don't worry about it. I remember my history book telling me that some of our most prosperous times did not involve our having fingerprints around the world.

i agree with most of what you say (and Hacksaw agrees). that said, i think

>>Established a government that is accountable to the people,
>>not the upper class of America.

is debatable. with the amount of lobbyists and corporate contributors that politicians deal with, the upper class seems much more 'represented' than the common man. the US has a better system than many countries, but the upper class always seems to wield power propotional to their wealth.


>>We have always had an orderly change of leadership
>>in Congress and the White House.

every presidential inauguration gives me goosebumps at some point (regardless of whether i voted for the new guy). yes, there are plenty of countries that have peaceful and orderly transitions of power, but hearing about the riots and chaos that happen to this day in some countries, it makes me proud to be part of a society where control of the nation is handed over in such a way.

[Ogre]

We were involved militarily in Vietnam well before JFK ever took office. JFK continued the escalation of our involvement there during his time in office. The killing of JFK had zero to do with "getting us into Vietnam."

Part of my confusion of what you're posting stems from statements like this one. Your historical breakdowns are all over the place and consist too much of generalizations and inaccuracies.

You are correct, Eisenhower sent the first Special Forces advisors to South Vietnam. Kennedy sent 500 more troops to Vietnam to bring the total to 1400 in May of 1961. The military wanted more. They got what they wanted eventually bringing the number of advisors and officers to 11,300 operating in South Vietnam.
In late 1963 Kennedy agreed to allow the CIA to assist in a military coup against Diem and his regiem in hopes of ending the war. Diem was assasinated November 2 1963. Kennedy ordered a reduction in force in country of 1000 troops. November 22 1963 Kennedy was assainated. If you check, I think you will find this to be accurate.

[keithy_19]

America is the greatest country in the history of man. I know a lot of you will roll your eyes at that, but I'm talking about what we have accomplished in our relatively short amount of time as being a country. We may not have the most beautiful country, or the best wine, beer, food or transportation system, but here is what we have accomplished:

Established a government that is accountable to the people, not the upper class of America.

We have always had an orderly change of leadership in Congress and the White House. No Coups or interruptions of orderly management of government by Parliamentry votes of "no confidence" like other modern forms of democratic government.

Our country is responsible for more free people around the world, and our presence in two world wars ensured that the world would not fall into the hands of Nazi Fascism (WWII) or a German Monarchy (WWI)

Having said that, even the best governments end, as did the Greeks and the Roman Republic.

If we are to slip away from being the superpower of the world, I don't know what short term problems that will cause us. But being a superpower does not define our existence. Prior to WWII, we were not a superpower. We were tired of war, and did not want to enter WWII, although our alliance with France and England was obviously the right thing to do.

If we concentrate on the Monroe Doctrine, and worry about our hemisphere and let the European Union worry about their hemisphere, we will remain strong and be able to protect ourselves from threats abroad. We don't need to be the cops of the world anymore. The rest of the world has a bias against us, not just because of Bush's doctrine, but the fact that the United States is the problem solver, for better or worse, while the U.N. hems and haws at crises that pop up around the world.

But I could be wrong about that. I just don't worry about it. I remember my history book telling me that some of our most prosperous times did not involve our having fingerprints around the world.


:clap:

[TheMojoPin]

You are correct, Eisenhower sent the first Special Forces advisors to South Vietnam. Kennedy sent 500 more troops to Vietnam to bring the total to 1400 in May of 1961. The military wanted more. They got what they wanted eventually bringing the number of advisors and officers to 11,300 operating in South Vietnam.
In late 1963 Kennedy agreed to allow the CIA to assist in a military coup against Diem and his regiem in hopes of ending the war. Diem was assasinated November 2 1963. Kennedy ordered a reduction in force in country of 1000 troops. November 22 1963 Kennedy was assainated. If you check, I think you will find this to be accurate.

What isn't accurate is the conspiracist's notion that Kennedy's tenative order for a mini-withdrawl was indicative of a larger desire or wish to pull out of Vietnam entirely. The recollections of Kennedy's inner circle and his other actions and statements between the tenative decision and his death indicate that the proposed withdrawl were posturing towards the South Vietnamese government to pressure them to get more in line with US wishes and demands, both before the coup and afterwards. Kennedy had absolutely no intention of "leaving Vietnam" completely in 1963, or at any time in his first term.

[Ogre]

What isn't accurate is the conspiracist's notion that Kennedy's tenative order for a mini-withdrawl was indicative of a larger desire or wish to pull out of Vietnam entirely. The recollections of Kennedy's inner circle and his other actions and statements between the tenative decision and his death indicate that the proposed withdrawl were posturing towards the South Vietnamese government to pressure them to get more in line with US wishes and demands, both before the coup and afterwards. Kennedy had absolutely no intention of "leaving Vietnam" completely in 1963, or at any time in his first term.

Upon further review my numbers and dates are abit off. Here is and excerpt from this (http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/1963_Vietnam_Withdrawal_Plans)


On October 11, 1963, Kennedy signed NSAM 263, initiating a withdrawal of 1,000 troops out of roughly 16,000 Americans stationed in Vietnam. Other documents, including planning documents from the spring of 1963, show that this was the first step in a planned complete withdrawal.

and this (http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=122&relPageId=7)
Mojo...you say tomato. I am going to bed. May we agree to disagree. That is what makes this country great.

[TheMojoPin]

Upon further review my numbers and dates are abit off. Here is and excerpt from this (http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/1963_Vietnam_Withdrawal_Plans)


On October 11, 1963, Kennedy signed NSAM 263, initiating a withdrawal of 1,000 troops out of roughly 16,000 Americans stationed in Vietnam. Other documents, including planning documents from the spring of 1963, show that this was the first step in a planned complete withdrawal.

Mojo...you say tomato. I am going to bed. May we agree to disagree. That is what makes this country great.

True, but FYI, a quick glance at that site shows that it is clearly pro-conspiracy in regards to JFK's death, and conspiracists most of the time hinge their theories on the idea that Kennedy was killed because he wanted to get out of Vietnam. They also state their theories as if they are unimpeachable fact. What you quoted above is exactly that. Most serious American historians find the idea that Kennedy was getting us out of Vietnam before his re-election, or even if he had served a second term, to be highly dubious at the very least. Kennedy's entire first term suffered from him being demonized by his opponents as being "soft on communism," and pulling out of Vietnam would have only backed up that claim and cost the Democrats HUGE in the upcoming elections. Remember, people didn't have the hindsight we have now in regards to the Missile Crisis. Many people saw the resolution of that as Kennedy wimping out and not stepping to the Soviets, especially in that he agreed to never invade Cuba. Withdrawing our forces from Vietnam would have basically been him saying "I don't want to be president for another 4 years and the Democrats are tired of running the Legislative branch since the days of FDR." It simply makes no sense for him to be getting the US out of Vietnam in 1963 or 1964.

People seem to hinge this thinking on this kind of theory:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/E4Dh01xth0M&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/E4Dh01xth0M&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Now after Kennedy had been re-elected, yes, there is a chance he could hae overseen a withdrawl based on 1963 estimates...but that assumes he wouldn't have reacted to developments there as Johnson did, with a White House made mostly of the same men Kennedy had advising him.

Record of Action No. 2472, Taken at the 519th Meeting of the National Security Council, Washington, October 2, 1963
McNAMARA-TAYLOR REPORT ON VIETNAM

a. Endorsed the basic presentation on Vietnam made by Secretary McNamara and General Taylor.

b. Noted the President's approval of the following statement of US policy which was later released to the press:


The security of South Viet Nam is a major interest of the United States as other free nations. We will adhere to our policy of working with the people and Government of South Viet Nam to deny this country to Communism and to suppress the externally stimulated and supported insurgency of the Viet Cong as promptly as possible. Effective performance in this undertaking is the central objective of our policy in South Viet Nam.

The military program in South Viet Nam has made progress and is sound in principle, though improvements are being energetically sought.

Major US assistance in support of this military effort is needed only until the insurgency has been suppressed or until the national security forces of the Government of South Viet Nam are capable of suppressing it.

Secretary McNamara and General Taylor reported their judgment that the major part of the US military task can be completed by the end of 1965, although there may be a continuing requirement for a limited number of US training personnel. They reported that by the end of this year, the US program for training Vietnamese should have progressed to the point where 1,000 US military personnel assigned to South Vietnam can be withdrawn.


The political situation in South Viet Nam remains deeply serious. The United States has made clear its continuing opposition to any repressive actions in South Viet Nam. While such actions have not yet significantly affected the military effort, they could do so in the future.

It remains the policy of the United States, in South Viet Nam as in other parts of the world, to support the efforts of the people of that country to defeat aggression and to build a peaceful and free society.

What about Kennedy's own words on Vietnam from September of 1963?

I don't think that unless a greater effort is made by the Government to win popular support that the war can be won out there. In the final analysis, it is their war. They are the ones who have to win it or lose it. . . . [I]n the final analysis it is the people and the Government [of South Vietnam] itself who have to win or lose this struggle. All we can do is help, and we are making it very clear. But I don't agree with those who say we should withdraw. That would be a great mistake. I know people don't like Americans to be engaged in this kind of an effort. Forty-seven Americans have been killed in combat with the enemy, but this is a very important struggle even though it is far away.

What about the speech Kennedy was on his way to make when he was killed?

Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others -- and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the Communist world to maintain their independence of choice. Our assistance to these nations can be painful, risky and costly -- as is true in Southeast Asia today. But we dare not weary of the task. . . . A successful Communist breakthrough in these areas, necessitating direct United States intervention, would cost us several times as much as our entire foreign aid program -- and might cost us heavily in American lives as well.

About 70 per cent of our military assistance goes to nine key countries located on or near the borders of the Communist bloc -- nine countries confronted directly or indirectly with the threat of Communist aggression -- Viet Nam, Free China, Korea, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Greece, Turkey and Iran. . . . Reducing our efforts to train, equip and assist their armies can only encourage Communist penetration and require in time the increased overseas deployment of American combat forces. And reducing the help needed to bolster these nations that undertake to help defend freedom can have the same disastrous result.

What about Bobby Kennedy's words about his brother in 1964?

KENNEDY: The President . . . had a strong, overwhelming reason for being in Vietnam and [believing] that we should win the war in Vietnam.

MARTIN: What was the overwhelming reason?

KENNEDY: Just the loss of all of Southeast Asia if you lost Vietnam. I think everybody was quite clear that the rest of Southeast Asia would fall.

MARTIN: What if it did?

KENNEDY: [It would just] have profound effects as far as our position throughout the world, and our position in a rather vital part of the world. Also, it would affect what happened in India, of course, which in turn has an effect on the Middle East. Just, it would have, everybody felt, a very adverse effect. It would have an effect on Indonesia, [with a] hundred million population. All of these countries would be affected by the fall of Vietnam to the Communists, particularly as we had made such a fuss in the United States both under President Eisenhower and President Kennedy about the preservation of the integrity of Vietnam.

MARTIN: There was never any consideration given to pulling out?

KENNEDY: No.

It is romantic to idealize the Kennedy years as some kind of "missed opportunity," but there is precious little evidence to indicate that that was the case. His words actually indicate a realist all too aware that US involvement in Vietnam would very likely escalate under his watch.

[Yerdaddy]

7 pages? not even yerdaddy would get away with that crap.

from the 1st page (can't be bothered reading further) he seems to think there's malaise here because we don't have the world's tallest building or biggest mall or largest ferris wheel. who needs that type of meaningless crap?

I can and I will!

But not today. And hopefully from now on my 7-pagers will be mostly about my poker winnings and rock hard abs. Being American, with your politics and your high-falootin' fancy book-learnin', is so last year!

I'm actually a big fan of Fareed Zakaria, and I look forward to reading his seven pages. And then forgetting them.

[Bulldogcakes]

I can and I will!

But not today. And hopefully from now on my 7-pagers will be mostly about my poker winnings and rock hard abs. Being American, with your politics and your high-falootin' fancy book-learnin', is so last year!

I'm actually a big fan of Fareed Zakaria, and I look forward to reading his seven pages. And then forgetting them.

Good for you.

[A.J.]

We were involved militarily in Vietnam well before JFK ever took office. JFK continued the escalation of our involvement there during his time in office. The killing of JFK had zero to do with "getting us into Vietnam."

Oh for the love of God, please don't resurrect that Kennedy Assassination thread again.

[Yerdaddy]

Good for you.

Don't get me started!

[Yerdaddy]

Oh for the love of God, please don't resurrect that Kennedy Assassination thread again.

Get him started!

[Ogre]

My muddled point from last night was that parties on both sides since WWII have been responsible for dragging us into conflicts for nothing more than political and or economic gains. To subscribe to the idea that GW Bush or the Republicans have taken us to a place on the world stage that we have never been before is one sided and lays a blind eye to history.

Soon there will be a day that the Democrats control The White House and Congress. Then it will be interesting to see who gets blamed for our nation's ills.

I still grow very tired of people, mostly politicians, that blame and point fingers rather than being part of the solutions.

Mojo sir... I relent. Victory is yours this round. Of course I got that from a Pro Kennedy conspiracy web site. How else could I support my wandering rants.

Still bitter and clinging to my guns and religion.

It was not my intention to turn this into a Kennedy debate and derail this thread.

peace

[TheMojoPin]

Oh for the love of God, please don't resurrect that Kennedy Assassination thread again.

If it's 60's politics, I can't help myself.

[TheMojoPin]

To subscribe to the idea that GW Bush or the Republicans have taken us to a place on the world stage that we have never been before is one sided and lays a blind eye to history.

Ogre, I'm really not trying to pick on you, but what are the American historical precedents that are comparable to today?

[Ogre]

Ogre, I'm really not trying to pick on you, but what are the American historical precedents that are comparable to today?

Yeah you are a little, but I opened the dialouge. I would say Carter was the worst President of all time accross the board.

Carter's administration failed to do anything in an effective response to the revolutionary government of Iran's taking American personel hostage for 444 days. We were humiliated by a then third world country holding 52 hostages while the rest of the world looked on in dismay and some with glee.

This same President presided over double digit inflation, as stagnant economy, an energy crisis (I remember sitting in the gas lines as a child with my parents). Also during his term the Prime Rate hit % 21.5.

During his term home mortgage rates were an astonishing %18. I would say that this would be the Misery Index benchmark. While we are not far behind this now with the unfolding of International and Domestic events, I would say that this would be the precedent that you asked for.

[TheMojoPin]

Yeah you are a little, but I opened the dialouge. I would say Carter was the worst President of all time accross the board.

Carter's administration failed to do anything in an effective response to the revolutionary government of Iran's taking American personel hostage for 444 days. We were humiliated by a then third world country holding 52 hostages while the rest of the world looked on in dismay and some with glee.

This same President presided over double digit inflation, as stagnant economy, an energy crisis (I remember sitting in the gas lines as a child with my parents). Also during his term the Prime Rate hit % 21.5.

During his term home mortgage rates were an astonishing %18. I would say that this would be the Misery Index benchmark. While we are not far behind this now with the unfolding of International and Domestic events, I would say that this would be the precedent that you asked for.

Economically, I would agree with you...there's nothing unprecedented about a stagnant American economy. I was taking issue more with your assertion that internationall things are comparable. I really don't see how the hostage siuation in any way is similar to the current international climate. The world was largely on the side of America during that crisis in terms of sympathy and opposition to Iran's actions. The foreign affairs tensions then really weren't in a climate at all similar to what we have now...the assumed threat of the Soviets was a totally different animal than the "war on terror." The nature of America's diplomatic relations with its allies were far stronger then than they are now. It's the summation of these events as people responding with "dismay and glee" that are the kind of things that are such vague generalizations that they don't really serve to back up your argument. Ameria as a superpower has never been in the situation it's in now in terms of alienatin its allies and burning bridges while making little to no headway on the international scene. The emergance of modern China since the 80's and the European Union as well as the non-Soviet eastern Europe make this a radically different world than America has ever faced in it's 60+ years as a global superpower. I'm also not sure how Iran was a "third world country" in the late 70's.

[Ogre]

That's me Admiral Von Vague. I think that the EU shares the same fears and concerns about radical Islam. As well as Austrailia. I would tend to agree that the Global support for the US is about paralell with GW's approval rating. About 30% but as the CINC would confidently state : "That's more than half" ***Caliendo slays me when he does that***.

I said "Uncle" about two posts ago. But if you continue to expose me for being a hothead that types before he thinks, I'll take my ball and go home.

[TheMojoPin]

Admiral von Vague is probably the best name anyone ever came up with here.

[Zorro]

America is the greatest country in the history of man. I know a lot of you will roll your eyes at that, but I'm talking about what we have accomplished in our relatively short amount of time as being a country. We may not have the most beautiful country, or the best wine, beer, food or transportation system, but here is what we have accomplished:

Established a government that is accountable to the people, not the upper class of America.

We have always had an orderly change of leadership in Congress and the White House. No Coups or interruptions of orderly management of government by Parliamentry votes of "no confidence" like other modern forms of democratic government.

Our country is responsible for more free people around the world, and our presence in two world wars ensured that the world would not fall into the hands of Nazi Fascism (WWII) or a German Monarchy (WWI)

Having said that, even the best governments end, as did the Greeks and the Roman Republic.

If we are to slip away from being the superpower of the world, I don't know what short term problems that will cause us. But being a superpower does not define our existence. Prior to WWII, we were not a superpower. We were tired of war, and did not want to enter WWII, although our alliance with France and England was obviously the right thing to do.

If we concentrate on the Monroe Doctrine, and worry about our hemisphere and let the European Union worry about their hemisphere, we will remain strong and be able to protect ourselves from threats abroad. We don't need to be the cops of the world anymore. The rest of the world has a bias against us, not just because of Bush's doctrine, but the fact that the United States is the problem solver, for better or worse, while the U.N. hems and haws at crises that pop up around the world.

But I could be wrong about that. I just don't worry about it. I remember my history book telling me that some of our most prosperous times did not involve our having fingerprints around the world.

You're kidding right?

In 200+ years we've managed to enslave a people, kill 600,000 of our own citizens in a civil war, decimate a population of natives and allow individuals and then corporations to control our destiny.

[scottinnj]

my 7-pagers will be mostly about my poker winnings and rock hard abs.

now you all know why i check the message boards everyday.

[scottinnj]

You're kidding right?

In 200+ years we've managed to enslave a people, kill 600,000 of our own citizens in a civil war, decimate a population of natives and allow individuals and then corporations to control our destiny.

Well Mr. Glass Half-Empty (wakka wakka)
I never said we were perfect. But the Constitution was written by people who put in place a way we could end the slavery.

We treated the Indians like shit, and now we know better. I doubt we are going to send a bunch of smallpox infested blankets to the next casino opening as a gift.

We have come so far, especially in my lifetime. The year I was born, we still had cops firehosing blacks and civil rights workers over voting rights. Now that I am almost 40, I have a chance to vote for a black man as President, not because he is black, but because of the remaining candidates, he is the right man for the job.

America has always been referred to as "the grand experiment" and I think we are doing well so far, and only better things will be happening. Sure we will screw up, but please name me a country that is perfect, and you and I will go and live there, I'll even spring for the airfare.

Until then, I'll stick with the experiment. I'm pretty sure we as fellow Americans can set things right better then most other nations can, if we stick together and look at the positive things we can do united, instead of bickering over mistakes we made whenever we were divided.

But I see your point, and if I'm correct, I think you are reminding us that we should never repeat the terrible things we did in the past.
And on that, I agree.

[Yerdaddy]

What I don't get is that the International community has crticized us for years for having to have the "biggest" of everything. Criticized for our greed and gluttony. Now we do not have the biggest mall or largest ferris wheel and that is a bad thing? This "journalist" simply has an agenda, like many in this world. They hate America.

I recommend you read the article. It's pretty much the opposite of what you - and others - have described. This is, in fact, the third long article Zakaria has written in the last few years trying to get across to Americans that they have much to be proud of, and that, if we can come to understand the value of the international systems we've created and exported, we can and will remain appropriately powerful and prosperous long into this century and beyond.

So if you all can stop your knees from jerking for a half hour to read the article you might actually gain a bit of optimism about the state of America in the world. Or not.

[scottinnj]

So if you all can stop your knees from jerking for a half hour to read the article you might actually gain a bit of optimism about the state of America in the world. Or not.

they call me mr. optimistic

[A.J.]

they call me mr. optimistic

They call me MISTER Tibbs!

[Ogre]

I recommend you read the article. It's pretty much the opposite of what you - and others - have described. This is, in fact, the third long article Zakaria has written in the last few years trying to get across to Americans that they have much to be proud of, and that, if we can come to understand the value of the international systems we've created and exported, we can and will remain appropriately powerful and prosperous long into this century and beyond.

So if you all can stop your knees from jerking for a half hour to read the article you might actually gain a bit of optimism about the state of America in the world. Or not.

So now I am the new poster boy for hot headed knee jerkers. I can handle it. I must admit I made it through about a page and a half and I made my assesment. Maybe some of my anger comes from the "we are doomed as a country and the reason lies at the foot of the current president." For the record, I do not like GW Bush. I think he is a Boob with conviction and resolve.

Yer Daddy, thank you for challenging me to read this all the way through. The later points in this article deal mainly with the global economy and I learned something from his points. I do not agree with is assesment of the Nuke advantage/reluctance summation. It only takes one.

I am humbled and abit more enlightened for this discussion.

I am STILL bitter and clinging to my guns and religion.

[scottinnj]

So now I am the new poster boy for hot headed knee jerkers.

No, we took a vote, and it's still Gvac.