If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   So, it is looking more and more like Nixon really did sabotage the Vietnam war peace talks under Johnson, letting it drag on five more years, killing hundreds of thousands of people. Just to win the election   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 175
    More: Sick, Viet Cong, hilton hotel, South Vietnamese, peace talks, North Vietnam, national security adviser, Richard Nixon, Tet Offensive  
•       •       •

5319 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Mar 2013 at 8:16 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



175 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-15 11:43:57 PM
Ni*on was a protege of Joe McCarthy, why would you expect anything less?

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-03-15 11:50:51 PM
It's no surprise that "war time president" was a continuous mantra during each Bush presidency.
 
2013-03-16 12:21:53 AM
Par for the course for a Republican President.
 
2013-03-16 05:24:08 AM
That really puts the seal on any hopes of a Nixon rehabilitation, doesn't it? They say he was a great president, especially on foreign policy, and if he wasn't a paranoid and petty man then that's how history would remember him, as great. Well, I fear history is about to get a lot more harsh on Nixon.
 
2013-03-16 06:03:06 AM
And people think I'm crazy when I say that ALL politicians have the moral values of Hitler. Hitler just had more opportunity.
 
2013-03-16 06:15:10 AM
USA! USA! USA!

/goddamnit
// war porn thread imminent
 
2013-03-16 08:19:58 AM
i23.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-16 08:20:02 AM
Saint Reagan / Jimmy Carter / 52 American hostages / etc.
 
2013-03-16 08:22:24 AM
This is Nixon's Gulf of Tonkin!
 
2013-03-16 08:22:36 AM
Back then, "because COMMUNISM" was the mantra for all politicians, the way "because TERROR" is today. Kennedy ran on hysterical anti-Communist paranoia. Nixon was vile in many ways, but not the only one to gladly use war for cheap political gain.
 
2013-03-16 08:25:12 AM
So, wait: criminal conspiracies happen? Among our highest officials?

Oh, no, it was only Nixon: he's the only one allowed to be 'evil' in our political mythology.
 
2013-03-16 08:27:13 AM

GAT_00: Par for the course for a Republican President.


Short thread, last one out hit the lights.
 
2013-03-16 08:27:25 AM
In late October 1968 there were major concessions from Hanoi which promised to allow meaningful talks to get underway in Paris - concessions that would justify Johnson calling for a complete bombing halt of North Vietnam. This was exactly what Nixon feared. The Paris peace talks may have ended years earlier, if it had not been for Nixon's subterfuge.

  Chennault was dispatched to the South Vietnamese embassy with a clear message: the South Vietnamese government should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal.


So on the eve of his planned announcement of a halt to the bombing, Johnson learned the South Vietnamese were pulling out.

He was also told why. The FBI had bugged the ambassador's phone and a transcripts of Anna Chennault's calls were sent to the White House. In one conversation she tells the ambassador to "just hang on through election".

Johnson was told by Defence Secretary Clifford that the interference was illegal and threatened the chance for peace.

Nixon went on to become president and eventually signed a Vietnam peace deal in 1973In a series of remarkable White House recordings we can hear Johnson's reaction to the news.
In one call to Senator Richard Russell he says: "We have found that our friend, the Republican nominee, our California friend, has been playing on the outskirts with our enemies and our friends both, he has been doing it through rather subterranean sources. Mrs Chennault is warning the South Vietnamese not to get pulled into this Johnson move."

He orders the Nixon campaign to be placed under FBI surveillance and demands to know if Nixon is personally involved.

When he became convinced it was being orchestrated by the Republican candidate, the president called Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader in the Senate to get a message to Nixon.
The president knew what was going on, Nixon should back off and the subterfuge amounted to treason.
Publicly Nixon was suggesting he had no idea why the South Vietnamese withdrew from the talks. He even offered to travel to Saigon to get them back to the negotiating table.

Johnson felt it was the ultimate expression of political hypocrisy but in calls recorded with Clifford they express the fear that going public would require revealing the FBI were bugging the ambassador's phone and the National Security Agency (NSA) was intercepting his communications with Saigon.

So they decided to say nothing.

The president did let Humphrey know and gave him enough information to sink his opponent. But by then, a few days from the election, Humphrey had been told he had closed the gap with Nixon and would win the presidency. So Humphrey decided it would be too disruptive to the country to accuse the Republicans of treason, if the Democrats were going to win anyway.

Nixon ended his campaign by suggesting the administration war policy was in shambles. They couldn't even get the South Vietnamese to the negotiating table.

He won by less than 1% of the popular vote.

Once in office he escalated the war into Laos and Cambodia, with the loss of an additional 22,000 American lives, before finally settling for a peace agreement in 1973 that was within grasp in 1968.

The White House tapes, combined with Wheeler's interviews with key White House personnel, provide an unprecedented insight into how Johnson handled a series of crises that rocked his presidency. Sadly, we will never have that sort of insight again.
 
2013-03-16 08:27:26 AM
I'm glad this sort of thing only happened forty years ago and couldn't POSSIBLY happen today.
 
2013-03-16 08:27:34 AM

heinrich66: So, wait: criminal conspiracies happen? Among our highest officials?

Oh, no, it was only Nixon: he's the only one allowed to be 'evil' in our political mythology.


FWIW, I'm old enough to remember seeing Nixon resign on the TeeVee machine, and I'm not really buying this bullshiat either.
 
2013-03-16 08:29:10 AM
If you refuse to read the article, at least read the above before trying to be a Nixon apologist.
 
2013-03-16 08:30:33 AM
Just imagine what we will learn when they finally release the JFK files. Can't be long now...

Maybe in 40 years we will also learn which corporation was behind 9/11
 
2013-03-16 08:31:27 AM
So what else is new!  The real question is what are today's politicians willing to kill to win reelection?

Soldiers

The economy

Babies
 
2013-03-16 08:31:38 AM
webpages.charter.net
 
2013-03-16 08:33:38 AM

lucksi: Just imagine what we will learn when they finally release the JFK files. Can't be long now...

Maybe in 40 years we will also learn which corporation was behind 9/11


You, sir, are a crank. Everybody knows it was Osama bin Laden who got the US government to pull down WTC Building 7, hours after it was never hit by a plane.
 
2013-03-16 08:34:47 AM
Well, Nixon had been looking like a statesman compared to many recent politicians.  That ends now.
 
2013-03-16 08:34:50 AM

RyogaM: If you refuse to read the article, at least read the above before trying to be a Nixon apologist.


Do you recall Humphrey's official position on Vietnam? This shiat doesn't happen in a vacuum.
 
2013-03-16 08:37:40 AM
He really was Emperor Palpatine, wasn't he?
 
2013-03-16 08:37:40 AM
Christ, that's huge. Watergate's got nothing on that.

/Johnson calling Daley up to congratulate him, while not surprising, is disgusting.
 
2013-03-16 08:46:22 AM
IIRC, this is all outlined pretty clearly in The President's Club.  I'm not sure what new information there is here, except maybe the actual recordings themselves.

Nixon also knew of these recordings and they were pretty much the impetus for Watergate in the first place.
 
2013-03-16 08:49:48 AM

MFAWG: RyogaM: If you refuse to read the article, at least read the above before trying to be a Nixon apologist.

Do you recall Humphrey's official position on Vietnam? This shiat doesn't happen in a vacuum.


Actually, I don't, but the article mentions that Johnson was taped saying the he felt Humphrey was too soft.  Are you suggesting that Johnson allowed Nixon's treasonous interference in the Peace conference to go unremarked because he wanted Nixon to win and not Humphrey?
 
2013-03-16 08:50:46 AM
This story is not new, it gets pulled out every 10 or 15 years. No doubt Nixon was an ass, but I doubt the talks in Nov. 1968 would have ended the war.
 
2013-03-16 08:52:56 AM

lucksi: Just imagine what we will learn when they finally release the JFK files. Can't be long now...


Weren't most of the sealed JFK files "lost"?
 
2013-03-16 08:53:30 AM
Thankfully we've found this out in time to at least prevent Nixon from being elected to another term.  I guess we'll have to wait 45 years for the truth about the second Iraq War.
 
2013-03-16 08:54:13 AM

RyogaM: MFAWG: RyogaM: If you refuse to read the article, at least read the above before trying to be a Nixon apologist.

Do you recall Humphrey's official position on Vietnam? This shiat doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Actually, I don't, but the article mentions that Johnson was taped saying the he felt Humphrey was too soft.  Are you suggesting that Johnson allowed Nixon's treasonous interference in the Peace conference to go unremarked because he wanted Nixon to win and not Humphrey?


I'm suggesting that it was pretty obvious to the South Vietnamese that they were going to get a better deal under Nixon than Humphrey. Nobody had to tell them that.
 
2013-03-16 08:57:27 AM

Animatronik: This story is not new, it gets pulled out every 10 or 15 years. No doubt Nixon was an ass, but I doubt the talks in Nov. 1968 would have ended the war.


The talks may not have ended the Vietnam War. But they might have, and we'll never know, because private citizen Richard M. Nixon, without any official standing in the US Government, used back channels to secretly undermine official peace talks of the US Government.

It's documented. And sure, it came out into public discourse every decade or so, as a rumor. The reason it's news now, though, is that the actual documents that confirm this rumor are now public.

Richard M. Nixon committed treason for personal gain.
 
2013-03-16 08:58:59 AM
Dick Nixon
Dick Cheney
Dick Armey


Why am I seeing a pattern here?
Is it a subconscious thing?
 
2013-03-16 09:02:53 AM

Ghastly: lucksi: Just imagine what we will learn when they finally release the JFK files. Can't be long now...

Weren't most of the sealed JFK files "lost"?


They will be soon. Right about the time of release.
 
2013-03-16 09:03:08 AM
If a Democratic candidate for President had done this 45 years ago, is there any doubt the GOP would still be using it today to win elections against the treasonous Democrats.
 
2013-03-16 09:03:29 AM
So if this conspiracy is true, that means they're all true, right? Moonlanding, second gunman, tower 7, Roswell, Clinton body count, New World Order, the Fed, electric car, Illuminati, AIDS, crack cocaine, MK Ultra, Philadelphia Experiment, chemtrails, numbers stations, Dick Clark, bigfoot, HAARP, fluoride, the Trilateral Commission and the reverse vampires all framed Nixon with these tapes. Watergate was the distraction to let the IMF get away with their jew gold.

We're through the looking glass, people.
 
2013-03-16 09:03:56 AM

X-boxershorts: Animatronik: This story is not new, it gets pulled out every 10 or 15 years. No doubt Nixon was an ass, but I doubt the talks in Nov. 1968 would have ended the war.

The talks may not have ended the Vietnam War. But they might have, and we'll never know, because private citizen Richard M. Nixon, without any official standing in the US Government, used back channels to secretly undermine official peace talks of the US Government.

It's documented. And sure, it came out into public discourse every decade or so, as a rumor. The reason it's news now, though, is that the actual documents that confirm this rumor are now public.

Richard M. Nixon committed treason for personal gain.


So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?
 
2013-03-16 09:05:11 AM

rogue49: Dick Nixon
Dick Cheney
Dick Armey


Why am I seeing a pattern here?
Is it a subconscious thing?


It all started with Dick the Third.
 
2013-03-16 09:05:27 AM
And probably a lot of other presidents started/entered wars for the economy(WW2 helped end the depression) or for reelection.
 
2013-03-16 09:05:50 AM

MFAWG: So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?


In public, for all eyes and ears, as a stated policy position, yes.

But, this is not at all what Nixon did.
 
2013-03-16 09:08:32 AM
Watergate was the distraction to let the IMF get away with their jew gold.


I hadn't heard that one. Were the Rothschilds, biCoastal Intellectual Elites, the Masons, and Space Alien Bible Giants involved?
 
2013-03-16 09:10:11 AM

X-boxershorts: MFAWG: So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?

In public, for all eyes and ears, as a stated policy position, yes.

But, this is not at all what Nixon did.


In your own words, tell me what he did? Because that's all I see here.
 
2013-03-16 09:14:08 AM
"War is simply the continuation of political intercourse with the addition of other means."

-Carl von Clausewitz
 
2013-03-16 09:14:46 AM

MFAWG: RyogaM: MFAWG: RyogaM: If you refuse to read the article, at least read the above before trying to be a Nixon apologist.

Do you recall Humphrey's official position on Vietnam? This shiat doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Actually, I don't, but the article mentions that Johnson was taped saying the he felt Humphrey was too soft.  Are you suggesting that Johnson allowed Nixon's treasonous interference in the Peace conference to go unremarked because he wanted Nixon to win and not Humphrey?

I'm suggesting that it was pretty obvious to the South Vietnamese that they were going to get a better deal under Nixon than Humphrey. Nobody had to tell them that.


It doesn't matter what the Vietnamese thought.  This is about Nixon's behavior.

Simple question: was sending a back channel, secret envoy to the Vietnamese telling them to pull out of Peace talks with the govt. and wait for Nixon treason or not?
 
2013-03-16 09:15:50 AM

MFAWG: X-boxershorts: MFAWG: So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?

In public, for all eyes and ears, as a stated policy position, yes.

But, this is not at all what Nixon did.

In your own words, tell me what he did? Because that's all I see here.


Read the article. Listen to the white house tape recordings. Do not fear knowledge that might shake your perceptions.

Private citizen Nixon carried on secret talks with the South Vietnamese government that persuaded that government to withdraw from peace talks
with North Vietnam that were brokered by the US Government and was the official policy of the US Government. This is legally defined as treason.

And the evidence of this is public record now.

That fact that you can't discern this is not my problem.
 
2013-03-16 09:18:00 AM
LBJ problems, Nixonified.
 
2013-03-16 09:18:36 AM

Kibbler: Nixon was vile in many ways, but not the only one to gladly use war for cheap political gain.


Not by any means. But the price in blood he paid was the highest.
 
2013-03-16 09:20:20 AM

RyogaM: MFAWG: RyogaM: MFAWG: RyogaM: If you refuse to read the article, at least read the above before trying to be a Nixon apologist.

Do you recall Humphrey's official position on Vietnam? This shiat doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Actually, I don't, but the article mentions that Johnson was taped saying the he felt Humphrey was too soft.  Are you suggesting that Johnson allowed Nixon's treasonous interference in the Peace conference to go unremarked because he wanted Nixon to win and not Humphrey?

I'm suggesting that it was pretty obvious to the South Vietnamese that they were going to get a better deal under Nixon than Humphrey. Nobody had to tell them that.

It doesn't matter what the Vietnamese thought.  This is about Nixon's behavior.

Simple question: was sending a back channel, secret envoy to the Vietnamese telling them to pull out of Peace talks with the govt. and wait for Nixon treason or not?


It absolutely matters what the South Vietnamese thought. If the South Vietnamese thought they were going to get a few more billion dollars in military aid from Nixon and were pretty sure that they weren't going to get it from Humphrey it doesn't really matter what Mrs. Chennault told some third tier cocktail party connection she had,

And it was pretty clear at the time that Nixon was going to retain the hard line, and Humphrey had come around to an antiwar position after the contentious 1968 Democratic Convention.
 
2013-03-16 09:21:03 AM

MFAWG: X-boxershorts: MFAWG: So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?

In public, for all eyes and ears, as a stated policy position, yes.

But, this is not at all what Nixon did.

In your own words, tell me what he did? Because that's all I see here.


In public in 1968, Nixon was saying he could not discuss his Vietnamese position in order to not disrupt the Peace talks.  Behind the scenes, he was sending secret envoys telling the Vietnamese not to attend the talks and wait to get a better deal.  You appear to be arguing just to argue.
 
2013-03-16 09:22:07 AM

X-boxershorts: MFAWG: X-boxershorts: MFAWG: So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?

In public, for all eyes and ears, as a stated policy position, yes.

But, this is not at all what Nixon did.

In your own words, tell me what he did? Because that's all I see here.

Read the article. Listen to the white house tape recordings. Do not fear knowledge that might shake your perceptions.

Private citizen Nixon carried on secret talks with the South Vietnamese government that persuaded that government to withdraw from peace talks
with North Vietnam that were brokered by the US Government and was the official policy of the US Government. This is legally defined as treason.

And the evidence of this is public record now.

That fact that you can't discern this is not my problem.


Read my post above. Then go study it out,

(I'm defending Nixon. We really ARE through the looking glass here.)
 
2013-03-16 09:23:55 AM

RyogaM: MFAWG: X-boxershorts: MFAWG: So a Presidential candidate shouldn't inform our surrogate states what they're going to do if elected?

In public, for all eyes and ears, as a stated policy position, yes.

But, this is not at all what Nixon did.

In your own words, tell me what he did? Because that's all I see here.

In public in 1968, Nixon was saying he could not discuss his Vietnamese position in order to not disrupt the Peace talks.  Behind the scenes, he was sending secret envoys telling the Vietnamese not to attend the talks and wait to get a better deal.  You appear to be arguing just to argue.


Oh, FFS. Nixon's ENTIRE POLITICAL CAREER was built on a hard line towards communist global expansion.
 
Displayed 50 of 175 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report