Posted on 05/31/2004 3:50:49 PM PDT by Interesting Times
Remember, though, Kennedy died in 68, Kerry didn't even get in country till 69, right?
Kerry arrived in-country on Nov 8, 1968 and left in April 1969. He was discharged from active duty Jan 3, 1970.
Great approach.
Do you mean the "Vietnam Veteran" (Mr. Patriotic)?! GAG! Can you imagine the military under this creep?
With Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and Gov. Ronald Reagan
As Broadcast over the CBS Television Network and the CBS Radio Network
Monday, May 15, 1967, 10:00 - 11:00 pm. EDT
Charles Collingwood, Host STEPHEN MARKS: Senator Kennedy, I'd like to ask you what you think of Dean Rusk's recent claim that the effect of anti-Vietnam war demonstrations in the States may actually be to prolong the war rather than to shorten it?
SENATOR ROBERT KENNEDY: The war is going on in Vietnam, being extended in Vietnam, really because of the determination of those who are our adversaries, the North Vietnamese, the Vietcong, National Liberation Front. I don't think a particular action takes place - military action takes place in South Vietnam because of the protests here in the United States. I think that if all the protests were ended, and even if all of the objections to the war came to an end here in this country, that the war in Vietnam would continue.
I'm sure to some extent the fact that there are some protests gives some encouragement to Ho Chi Minh and to others. But I don't - I certainly don't think that that's the reason the war is continuing, and why the casualties are going up.
GOVERNOR REAGAN: Well, I definitely think the demonstrations are prolonging the war in that they're giving the enemy, who I believe must face defeat on relative comparison of the power of the two nations, they are giving him encouragement to continue, to hold out in the hope that division here in America will bring about a peace without defeat for that enemy.
Many of the demonstrations now taking place in this country could not legally take place if there was a legal declaration of war, so we, I think, are faced with a choice here. But again, and I'm sure the Senator agrees with me, America will jealously guard this right of dissent, because I think the greatness of our country has been based on our thinking that everyone has a right even to be wrong.
True but, eventually, so was the United States Congress.
The Vietnam experience should be a reminder of how opportunistically, deceptively, and tirelessly the capitulation crowd will pursue their agenda: the humbling of America, preferably by blood-splattered third-world thugs.
Aside from the Tom Haden types who openly wanted a communist victory (from whom Kerry fitfully tried to distance himself, even while collaborating with them under the table, and arguing against those who wanted them excluded from the "peace" movement) the capitulators allegedly wanted a negotiated settlement in Vietnam.
They sneered at Nixon's promise of "peace with honor," but only, so they claimed, because they interpreted it as Republican code for continuing and widening the war. (In fact Nixon steadily reduced troop strength in IndoChina throughout his tenure.) Supposedly, again excepting the open communists and ultra-radicals, they would be happy to see the maintenance of an independent and non-communist South Vietnam; they just argued it wasn't possible. Essentially they took the position that the war was lost, South Vietnam would probably go communist, and the best we could do was to secure the return of our POWs in exchange for our unilateral withdrawal.
Those who supposedly wanted a negotiated peace, the extraction of American forces, and the release of POW's should have been delighted, then, when Nixon (via Kissinger) negotiated an agreement that, if enforced, achieved all this and much more.
But they weren't. The truth is they never expected Nixon could pull it off (peace with honor -- an agreement that would end the war for America and give South Vietnam a credible chance to withstand the implacable North Vietnamese hegemons) so it was safe to claim they wanted it.
Instead, without pause or embarrassment, indeed with undiminished if not intensified moral posturing, those who had clamored, voted and agitated for "peace" set about undermining in every possible way the peace accords that had been negotiated. (This wasn't that much of a shift. After all the peace crowd had attempted to hinder Nixon's program of "Vietnamization" at every step, even though it was the necessary consequence of the troop reductions they demand and Nixon supplied.)
The Paris agreement fell short of the original American demands, from the 60's, of mutual withdrawal from South Vietnam. Instead the North Vietnamese would be allowed to keep their deployed troops in country (in effect a ceasefire in place) but would not be allowed to replace men or equipment. All supplies would be checked at border crossings by third party monitors. If these terms were enforced, the North Vietnamese forces would eventually wither away. (The South Vietnamese communists had already been all but eliminated as an effective fighting force in the aftermath of Tet.)
Of course the North Vietnamese never observed the terms of their agreement. Within months their illegal supply lines running through Laos and Cambodia were choked with trucks, troops and even armor headed for South Vietnam. First the capitulationists in America made it politically impossible for Nixon to bomb this bumper to bumper traffic in order to enforce the Paris agreement, but soon (after "peace" candidates packed the Congress in '74) they would literally make it illegal to do so.
Soon we could not fly over Cambodia, have a single military adviser there, nor send the beleaguered government a single dollar that might buy a bullet for their defense. Even non-defense aid was slashed to nearly nothing by those who claimed to be for "peace". The "peace" crowd had the same prescription for South Vietnam itself. Aid was slashed to the point where our allies in South Vietnam, who had fought beside us for decades, to whose defense our country had been solemnly committed under five Presidents of both parties, and under a Democratically controlled Congress, had to fight without artillery and mortars. They couldn't afford more ammo. Some units even ran out of bullets before the end. Congress had been bickering for months over the cost of a (barely adequate) supplemental aid package for South Vietnam when the final collapse came.
The results? America's credibility was shattered. (Thank God for Reagan, who began to rebuild it much sooner than might have been the case otherwise.) Totalitarianism, extremism and thuggery experienced their greatest global advances since the aftermath of WWII. Millions were butchered in Cambodia and South Vietnam.
But, to the capitulationists, this was a small price to pay for humbling American power and prestige, and "getting" a Republican president.
DON'T EVER think they won't be willing to pay that same price, or a much larger one, again. And, as Kerry goes through the motions of "talking tough" wrt the war on terror, never forget that he was a leader of the capitulation movement in the Vietnam era and, not withstanding half-hearted regrets over matters of word choice, still considers those efforts honorable.
The fatal records of John Kerry is emerging. There will be much more damaging things to come.
I strongly believe that the Bush campaign is holding on something that will destroy Kerry in matters of days, but they are waiting for the appropriate time to release it or give it to someone else to relase it. Once it is released, it is all over for John Kerry.
Pls. See above for documentation on RFK
Perhaps, but it would be a mistake to count on it...
sweet.
Great link in comment# 24 for emailing friends about what one foreign leader and Vietnam veterans think about John F'n Kerry.
EXCELLENT post! Even now, in the year 2004, Vietnam is grossly anti-American. The news featured in the papers is almost exclusively from those well meaning friends of ours, the French. Anything else is typically from the NY Slimes or some equally odious source.
The young people have swallowed the propaganda that Ho Chi Minh was a great hero when, after all, he was a drug smuggler and terrorist, a smart guy though.
Nor do I trust him. He has too many questions that have not been answered. His response to legit questions is that 'it is none of my business.' Scary///////////////
John Kerry is a traitor and should be treated as such. Judging from TV coverage, I don't think Mr. Kerry had many hands to shake today on this Memorial Day! The American people are getting wise to this loser and useless human being!!!! He is only fit to be "dog catcher" material. But, then again, I certainly do not want to upset dog catchers!!!
"ooooohhhhhh, would love to see a video clip of THAT!!!"
It's not a video ... but it's a transcript
http://www.cs.umb.edu/jfklibrary/rfk-reag.htm
maybe the reagan library would have an audio tape of this - that would be outstanding...
"I strongly believe that the Bush campaign is holding on something that will destroy Kerry in matters of days, but they are waiting for the appropriate time to release it or give it to someone else to relase it. Once it is released, it is all over for John Kerry."
I suspect you are right, but I think you have the wrong "holder" id'd. Perhaps GWB does have it, but I suspect that the PIAPS has it.
yep....and major media will probably not even mention it....they might even be jealous.
Not my post... forwarding to jveritas.
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.
