Posted on 11/16/2013 9:48:54 PM PST by fella
And the Cuban Missile Crisis, on some subsequent readings of history, was not a triumph of bold statesmanship as it was hailed at the time, but a piece of foolhardy grandstanding that unnecessarily humiliated the Soviets and precipitated the arms race that defined the Cold War.
Even on civil rights – the subject of one of Kennedy's greatest speeches in June 1963, when he vowed that "Every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as he would wish to have his children treated." – the reality never matched the myth.
Kennedy made good on his campaign promises on equal rights but only, we now know, after being forced to intervene by growing violence in the South. Until that point, along with his brother Robert, the attorney-general, it was pragmatism not principle that had governed decision-making.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Fieldmarshaldj wrote:
“Stood face to face against the USSR ? Khruschev ate his lunch. Nixon never would’ve folded like a cheap suit.”
You were born AFTER the Fall of The Berlin Wall, weren’t you?
The Berlin Wall was very much up and running in my birth year, sir.
You have a lot to learn about JFK, he was an enemy of America.
A thoroughly corrupt, vain, incompetent, pretty boy, liberal that wanted to change immigration to replace the American voters.
Nothing is real when it comes to him, even his “heroism” that his dad fixed.
http://www.csmonitor.com/1991/1119/19182.html
NO one has provided more persuasive evidence that it was President John F. Kennedy who got the United States into the Vietnam war than James Reston in his recently published memoir, “Deadline.”Describing his interview with Mr. Kennedy following the young president’s summit with Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna, Mr. Reston has this to say: “I remember that Saturday morning very well. He (Kennedy) arrived at the US embassy (in Vienna) over an hour late, shaken and angry at having been delayed by an unexpected extra meeting with the Soviet leader. He was wearing a hat - unusual for him - and he pushed it down over his forehead, sat down on a couch beside me, and sighed. I said it must have been a roug h session. Much rougher than he had expected, he said.” Kennedy then told Reston that Mr. Khrushchev had threatened him, warning that if the US did not agree to communist control over access to Berlin, the Soviet Union would proceed unilaterally to dominate the routes from Western Europe to Berlin. Kennedy said that he replied that the US would fight to maintain access to its garrison in Berlin if necessary. Kennedy then went on to tell Reston that he felt sure that Khrushchev thought that anybody who had made such a mess of the Cuban invasion had no judgment. “Khrushchev,” writes Reston, “had treated Kennedy with contempt, even challenging his courage, and whatever else Kennedy may have lacked, he didn’t lack courage. He felt he had to act.” Soon thereafter Kennedy sent more advisers to the battlefront in Vietnam. “This, I thought,” Reston continues, “was a critical mistake. Once Kennedy had over 15,000 ‘advisers’ engaged not only in giving advice but also in giving support on the battlefield. US power and prestige were thought by many officials in Washington and in Asian capitals to be committed.”
Not to mention a drug addicted sexual degenerate who put the entire country in jeopardy (not to mention willingly participating in the greatest electoral fraud in the 20th century). Is it any surprise the similarly degenerate and debauched media worships at his altar ?
I lived on a main thoroughfare in Miami during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Woke up during the night to the sound of Army trucks hauling Nike and Hawk missiles by my house.
Bought my first transistor radio, stored water, meager prepping(I was a poor newlywed.).
Anyway,, after it was all over I concluded that at least the timing was, as we term in today an ‘October Surprise’. Just before the mid-terms.
JFK , while a quick wit delivering entertaining press conferences, was having difficulty with his own Party and the public wasn’t that enamored with him.
IMO he needed the ‘Crisis’ to bolster support.
A good part of LBJs Great Society was JFKs idea. Most of it was passed in Congress as a memorial to JFK.
You mean that the guy who approved of his mean-assed brother bugging MLK, wouldn’t have liked the idea of listening in on anyone who caught his fancy? I call BS.
“The reason JFK didn’t have a thorough autopsy was because Bobby Kennedy knew he was taking all kinds of drugs and forced people in Dallas to return his body to DC so they could hide that fact according to several shows I have watched lately.”
The Kennedy’s also arranged for Mary Joe Koepechne’s to be quickly transported out of Massachusetts so the autopsy required by state law would not be performed.
Saint Jack did not write "Profiles in Courage" anymore than he wrote anything else that came with his name attached.
Absolutely zero reason to have an autopsy anyway. EVERYONE knew why he died. Goodness he might not have been the best president, but his death was a tragedy on the nation who never really recovered. That is why he is given such attention. I was not born yet, but from what I understand the entire nation was in grief for months. That is why he tends to be on a pedestal. I don’t think it is a big deal for people to revere him after the tragedy. It is not like we have another president who died in office in that fashion (at least in modern times).
I was born when FDR (spit!) was in the White House, Terry, and here’s the news: While publicy grandstanding and taking credit for “facing down” the Russians, Kennedy made a secret side deal with them, pulling our tactical nukes out of Turkey. We had the USSR virtually surounded fifty years ago and Saint Jack let it slip away giving old Nikita what he wanted in the first place.
BS! He was despised by quite a number of people who took no joy in his being killed but were nonetheless quite glad he was gone.
And no. I do not remember where I was when I heard the news. Just amazed at the tearful reaction of news anchors who lost their fairy tale President whom they created.
Again since I was not born until 7 years later, I really don’t know, but maybe the media was on his side like Obama. I am just convinced that JFK wanted to destroy the US like Obama wants too, but you have more experience with this since you were born during the time.
Having been born in 1950, I was fully engaged as a news junkie during the Kennedy years. Watched TV news, read the newspapers, and read US News & World Report.
The country was shocked and in grief, but not for “months.” There was plenty else to occupy the minds of the masses. And Johnson was savvy enough to keep his face on TV enough to calm anyone who thought there was no one in charge.
Also, on Feb 7, 1964, The Beatles came to America, and that event was of sufficient impact to distract everyone.
Remember too, the civil rights struggle was ramping up at the time, and it was quite the news event.
I was reading your post, and thought f the event that got us out of the funk after the events of Nov. 1963, and thought of the Beatles, and then you said it in your post.
In 1964, The Beatles were good for America, and America was good for the Beatles.
One other thing to recall about those times. Most everyone was working, and there was abundant economic rewards for anyone who wanted to work.
Work, in and of itself, is rewarding and tends to mollify other unpleasant events in one’s life.
Also, the huge welfare underclass that we have to deal with today was not a factor. Johnson gets credit for creating that chronic problem.
A couple of things I learned this assassination cycle.
1. Even if Illinois went to Nixon JFK still would have won because he carried Texas because of LBJ. So he did not steal the election.
2. The loss was more about Jackie Kennedy. She was the star that the world craved more so than Jack. IMO.
To libs Obama is the Mwesiah and Bill Clinton is St. Peter.
Kennedy is their dead/martyrd past messiah and FDR, too, is the past St. Peter.
And Lincoln (although Republican). he is played to the LIV as another dead/matryrd Democrat messiah, simply because they are too stupid to realize he wasn’t a Dem.
I think you would enjoy reading the opinion of Paul Johnson, the eminent British historian, in his book "A History of the American People" (c. 1997). He absolutely savaged Kennedy. He also stated that Nixon was a much superior man, and I agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.