Posted on 07/29/2014 9:13:26 PM PDT by aardwolf46
I’m not the one dismissing non-liberal history and trying to rewrite America and Vietnam.
I tended to agree with the republicans at the time, and was puzzled by JFK’s incompetence and knack for messing things up.
I would ask you again McGruff to consider why the current Kiev government would shoot down a plane that their foes did not possess, assuming it was a misidentification of a military transport flying at 33K feet and just about to cross the border into Russian territory, not the other way around. Especially when they have access to the radar identification transponder signals. And, to the communications and air traffic control.
To do so you would have to surmise that the commercial jet was shot down specifically to blame the Russians for it and cause a great debate for what purpose?
It would have been a better idea if they had used a American Airliner for that purpose....so I guess they are just stoooopid.
LOL
It's history.
And it's real easy for me to Monday morning quarterback the geopolitical mistakes made some 60-70 years ago and since.
The origins of the quotes you posted were the political beliefs in the US at the time. In retrospect with the aid of the history that occurs at the time and since, I have a informed perspective, not revisionist at all.
For example, had US politicians of the 50s, 60s and 70s known that Communism was not really expanding and was dying at the root, (USSR), we would not have been able to sell the wars that evolved from this belief to the public or anyone else, and each of the military interventions would have had to be fought on their respective merits and not fear of the future.
As to the future from here and now, I have speculations but no history to guide the opinions.
But I do have history to guide what I have written today.
JFK was a foreign policy disaster, and to take off the pressure, he got us into Vietnam, he was a boob.
No JFK, no Vietnam war, and no 1965 Immigration Act, and no unionized government, and Castro would not still be there 50 years after him.
As did I and still would have had I not studied the history written since, from a 50 thousand foot perspective that history gives me.
Rationalizing it, you can see why they thought what they did and I am not trying to dismiss them. It happened...It was what it was.
But I can't extend those fears and ideas to today's geopolitical situation, except to explain how many current political animosity is based on the past.
Russia is no longer Communist and even though the Chinese government is, they have liberalized it to the extent that it is no longer recognizable as anything but a authoritarian cabal.
Just as in the 60s, the Russians and Chinese act in a pact, with the goal to destabilize and defeat the US imperialists.
So that aspect has not changed at all.
Who has benefited from this shoot down. The Russians no, The separatist no, the Ukrainians yes.
Sure, any president since Kennedy, or before Kennedy, (in the case of Korea) to include Kennedy, could have just ignored Vietnam, much as presidents before them did. But they were swayed by fearful political arguments first in Korea and then in Vietnam that Communism was expanding, as I indicated.
But nobody ignored it except for Truman and he could. Under Eisenhower it became a UN problem and thus we got involved to save the free world. It all made so much sense then...
The U.S. government viewed American involvement in the war as a way to prevent a Communist takeover of South Vietnam. This was part of a wider containment strategy, with the stated aim of stopping the spread of communism. According to the U.S. domino theory, if one state went Communist, other states in the region would follow, and U.S. policy thus held that accommodation to the spread of Communist rule across all of Vietnam was unacceptable.
Beginning in 1950, American military advisors arrived in what was then French Indochina. U.S. involvement escalated in the early 1960s, with troop levels tripling in 1961 and again in 1962.[39] U.S. involvement escalated further following the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which a U.S. destroyer clashed with North Vietnamese fast attack craft, which was followed by the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which gave the U.S. president authorization to increase U.S. military presence. Regular U.S. combat units were deployed beginning in 1965
Ummmmm.....yeah, Russia cannot benefit from shooting down ANOTHER commercial airliner, and nor can their proxy’s, the separatists.
So therefore, it is the Kiev governments fault?
Nice leap of logic, but it won’t fly.
Another thing McGruff...
If you look at the vector and altitude that the plane was travelling, it was leaving the area to the South East and was obviously not part of the engagements on the ground in the Ukraine. Logically, it could not have been relevant.
Therefore it was a accidental shootdown and following leads like who benefits and the usual “follow the money” arguments, do not seem to have any bearing on it.
Yet for some reason, (Putin’s reputation) some are trying very hard to inject stuff into this that won’t fit.
How about their confession in social media postings? As for the videos, Bezler admitted they were real, although he claimed he was somehow "taken out of context." In so doing he also admitted to reporting back to the Russian GRU, whom he was speaking with.
Nice try but I said they had the most to benefit from this shoot down.
But since you mention it, their traffic controller diverted the plane right over the war zone so they are at fault also.
And where are those traffic control tapes? They can come out with supposedly two rebels talking about shooting down the plane but they can't come out with any of the air traffic control tapes for that day. I hope they don't have the same type of hard drives our IRS has.
Um, no, continuous rod warheads are quite useless against armor and are ONLY used in anti-air munitions.
Well....knowing that air traffic control is indeed taped, or should be, I still don’t know who was directing the aircraft. I don’t know that is was Kiev. And I don’t know who it was..
But sure, I would like to hear the tape. There should also be tapes from other controllers within range that received and taped the exchanges with the aircraft. There should also be witnesses to that conversation in the form of other commercial pilots who may have overheard it.
So far, I am not seeing any of that..
So I am not going to say that if the info is there, that it is not relevant. I think the question is, what happened to it and is it being withheld as a policy matter of just a legal one. Or does it simply not exist..
All the Buk missile variants have a blast fragmentation warhead. There’s a companion vehicle optimized for smaller and more agile targets that is often deployed with Buk systems called the Tunguska that does carry a CR warhead, though.
And you are 100% wrong. No Buk missile yet deployed has a continuous rod warhead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system
There have been sporadic reports of heavy fighting in and around the area where the wreckage came to rest, including combat with IFVs that mount a 30mm cannon. Intentional or not, it is possible for the wreckage to have been shot up by one. (After the aircraft crashed and became wreckage, that is.)
Sure, they could, in a effort to confuse or destroy evidence, but that effort would be evidence in and of it’s self.
In time, we should get a forensic investigation.
Just don’t expect it anytime soon. They withheld a lot of stuff from the Korean airline downing as well, but eventually it came to light.
All this confusion is not just a Russian issue. There was a lot of it when we took out a Iranian airliner as well. All sorts of claims...like they emptied out a morgue and put them on the plane.
Some of which is still argued today.
First picture which SBU says is dated July 17 shows a made field (upper left)
Second picture is the one claimed by Russia taken on July 16.
Similarly with the third and fourth picture, where the former Russian picture has a tree line and Ukrainian doesn't, it was cut down 4 days prior.
The thing with Su-25 is a non-starter, it can't reach that high. They had the engineer who made the thing saying it's not possible.
Russian thing is to introduce a POSSIBILITY that a Ukrainian Buk was in the area. (It's POSSIBLE it was Bababooey all along; see where we're going with this?)
Ukraine had no reason to use the Buk - the Russian fighters have no Air Force. The Russians had the Buk, used it before, and had claimed credit when they shot down MH17.
~Um, no, continuous rod warheads are quite useless against armor and are ONLY used in anti-air munitions~
I know and never said it is good for armor.
~And you are 100% wrong. No Buk missile yet deployed has a continuous rod warhead ~
Ah, if Wikipediqa said so... AFAIK the most common munitions (9m317) is a continuous rod.
Who said anything about trying to kill Castro, and no presidents could not “ignore” Vietnam once JFK got us there, LBJ could have suddenly withdrawn, but he didn’t want to accept the blow, and Nixon could not ignore it.
Truman and the UN, could not ignore Korea, and Eisenhower did not get us into war in Vietnam.
Your posts are all over the place, and baffling, some of them are so confusing it is impossible to respond to them.
Bottom line is you are wrong to be a democrat supporter and defending the despicable man who’s election destroyed America, got us into Vietnam, cost us Cuba, and who’s lifelong dream of replacing the American people came true after his death, a man that Reagan despised and called Marxist in 1960, in private.
You might want to recheck your heroes and politics.
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.