Share this comment
It's true that Nixon inherited the mess from LBJ, but before that, JFK inherited the mess from Eisenhower who unintentionally scaled up the war with stop-gap measures to help the hapless French who should not have gone back to Indochina at all. They needed to clean up their own yard after WWII. Their being there was a fault of De Gaulle'…
It's true that Nixon inherited the mess from LBJ, but before that, JFK inherited the mess from Eisenhower who unintentionally scaled up the war with stop-gap measures to help the hapless French who should not have gone back to Indochina at all. They needed to clean up their own yard after WWII. Their being there was a fault of De Gaulle's ego. Viet Nam was an unmanaged mess when JFK took over in 1960. On top of that he had a full plate fighting the MIC over other big issues in the Whitehouse. Then as soon as the reins of power were in the hands of LBJ, a full supporter of the MIC, he turned it into a super mess. By 1968, Nixon was the only person in the game with an honorable perspective- to end the war. Kissinger was just going through motions of peacemaking. His heart was with the deep state. I knew at the time Nixon was being shafted. Monica Crowley worked for him, admired him and wrote a book about him. Her article here is a good one.
Thanks, Kal, for one comment that correctly places the blame for the entire VN conflict on the French. Had they not been so worried about their colonialist interests, the French and we Americans might have realized that the ultimate fate of VN had zero bearing on the security of the French and American homelands.
what a bunch of crap you've written here. The french being idiots is a justification for the u.s. to be idiots? Huh?
Well you said it- The US did follow the French into idiocy. Nobody made the right decision because the prevailing narrative was already set and influencing all decisions- that being the Domino Theory. How could any politician after WWII ignore the threat of Communism? They should have been more intelligent and acted differently but it comes back to politics which is not intelligent but expedient. Eisenhower should have crushed it, but he didn't. France should not have had the support of the allies and UN to go back to Indochina, but they did. They raised an army of Foreign Legionnaires with money borrowed from (I wonder who). They barely got their tents set up in the jungle when they began begging the US for assistance. Somebody in Washington handled it. To Eisenhower it wasn't that big of a deal, YET, but it grew from there. He was war weary, and more inclined to build Interstates, but he knew what was going on and he warned us.
How could any politician after WWII ignore the threat of Communism?
I agree with that. But the proper response would have been to understand that communism was an invention of the bankers to get us to like the idea of having nothing and being happy. Bill Cooper understood it well, cost him first his leg, then his life. He was a real hero. World War one and two were one war. The expression "theater of war" is not for nothing. These wars are always staged and for the benefit of the people who start them in the background. The bankers.
nixon had the opportunity and passed it up. A reporter asked him if he thought he paid his fair share when he paid 297 dollars in federal income tax on a 1/4 million of revenue.
If he'd have said, yes, I paid even more than I should have because the income tax is anti-constitutional, then I'd join you in respecting him.