[AaronInCarolina]

Vietnam all started with liars and lies of the Democrats. Why should the Dems be any different now.

They are not. Notice that while the anti-war movement festered while Democrats were president, it exploded when Nixon won the presidency. It took on a whole new dimension and a quantum leap upward in terms of radicalism and vitriol. Even Kerry may not have been so against the war until an event that happened in November of 1968... Nixon (a Republican) was elected president and Kerry's whole attitude changed. Suddenly he's out in a matter of months and he protesting the war now and calling his comerades and his President monsters.

Fast-forward 30 years... Kerry practically begs Bill Clinton to go in and toss out Sadam Hussein, who was a real threat to the whole world because the whole world knew that he had WMD's, and had used them on his own people. For 5 or six years Kerry has been screaming that Hussein was a danger to America, and indeed the whole world. Then an event happened in November 2000... George W. Bush, a Republican, was elected president. And George W. Bush did exactly what Kerry has been begging some president to do for 5 or 6 years... Take out Sadam Hussein and disarm him. Suddenly it was 1969 all over again. A change of attitude conspicuously related to a change in presidency from Democrat to Republican. Notice how nobody in the present-day anti-war movement raised a single peep about Clinton's exploits in Yugoslavia, in a war that had absolutely zero national interest to the U.S., or posed any threat whatsoever to U.S. security. But let a Republican president do what many Democrats had been calling for for years (overthrow Hussein) and their tune changes from hawk to dove overnight. It's nothing but politics and its putrid.

[elbucko]

Notice that while the anti-war movement festered while Democrats were president, it exploded when Nixon won the presidency.

You're right. It would have been better for the troops in Vietnam, for LBJ, as bad as he was, to have had a second term. There would have been less anti-war demonstrations and LBJ would have shown some guts to the enemy by sticking it out, rather than tucking his tail under his leg and slithering back to Texas.

But that's, as you note, standard for the Democrats, as Kerry did the "Cut and Run Boogie" from "Nam", after only four months.

Notice how nobody in the present-day anti-war movement raised a single peep about Clinton's exploits in Yugoslavia, in a war that had absolutely zero national interest to the U.S., or posed any threat whatsoever to U.S. security.

The anti-war movement was conspicuous by its absence. It always is when the Democrats are in the White House. The anti-war movement is part of the Democratic Party.