Not sure which I like better. This one, or the old "...but he would have gotten us out, had he lived." Doesn't matter. In either case, it's his war.
I can tell you that he never showed any sign of distress or addiction in his public appearances (I personally watched him run and swim in the Pacific ocean from a distance of feet rather than yards and noticed nothing).
Thanks for your expert opinion. Did it occur to you that you observed Kennedy immediately after he go a fix? In any case it matters not. His drug problem is well documented, and nobody can function at peak levels indefinitely on the substances he has taking. Remain in denial if you wish.
He also seems to have engaged in illegal liquor running.
This is the primary source of the Kennedy family fotune. Again, there is no disagreement on this.
Policy towards Russia.
Too complicated to summarize.
In other words, "I either can't defend his amateurism behavior that led Kruschev to disrespect the man and the country, or I have no idea what I am talking about."
A misunderstanding here. I thought bugging the office to be quite reasonable.
LOL. You tried to argue that it didn't happen. Go ahead and change your tune if you must.
VietNam again.
Who comitted the troops? Refresh my memory.
Kennedy was president for less than three years. In that time, he accopmplished very little. Why is this so hard for you to accept.
The policy of the United States - since at least 1950 - was that it was vital to U.S. interests to prevent a Communist take-over of Viet-Nam. To this end
a) The Eisenhower administration paid up to 80% of the French war effort
b) threatened nuclear war to prevent an all-out Communist victory after DienBienPhu, a threat which resulted in the loss of only half the country
c) Installed a puppet and refused to acquise in the required election after two years
d) paid for the puppets government and army
e) committed a certain number of advisors
When Kennedy took office that policy was failing. He choose to commit additional "advisors" (17,000 if memory serves. I'll have to check). They were not there to fight. There was no official combat between America and VietNam during the Kennedy administration.
That policy also failed at the just before Kennedy was assassinated. What he would have done is unknown.
Despite all this you choose to call it Kennedy's war.
His drug problem is well documented, and nobody can function at peak levels indefinitely on the substances he has taking
Thank you for your expert opinion. In fact, nobody can function at peak levels indefinitely under any circumstances.
This is the primary source of the Kennedy family fotune. Again, there is no disagreement on this
Do a google on Joseph P. Kennedy. You'll find there's plenty of disagreement.
In other words, "I either can't defend his amateurism behavior that led Kruschev to disrespect the man and the country, or I have no idea what I am talking about."
In other words, it's too complicated to summarize. I'm looking at Lawrence Freedman's "Kennedy's War" - 500 pages with 30 devoted to the Cold war, 60 to Berlin and Nuclear Stategy, 100 to Cuba, 25 to alliances and detente, 100 to VietNam, and 100 to Conclusion and Notes. Basically an entire book devoted to America's relations with the Soviet Union under Kennedy.
I guess you think it's all fluff and your summary is more accurate.
You tried to argue that it didn't happen.
In which post or posts did I do that? I suspect this is going to be about as accurate at your claim that I didn't analogize the U.S. government to an ocean liner.
Kennedy was president for less than three years. In that time, he accopmplished very little. Why is this so hard for you to accept
Because I remember that he countered the Soviet threat and inspired the world's peoples with respect for America and American ideals and hope for the future. Not everyone everywhere (that's never possible) but in overwhelming numbers.