Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem
There is little more to this story than Kissinger shooting the breeze with the Chinese leader. Please don't be fooled by misleading headlines and fraudulent history. We lost South Vietnam after Watergate because teh liberal democrats in Congress prevented President Ford from even giving the South Vietnamese equipment, after the N Viets launched an all out tank assault in violation of the treaty.

We did NOT lose Vietnam because either Ford, Nixon or Kissinger had given the North a "green light" to invade after we withdrew.

The liberal press will always pretend "we" "lost" Vietnam when in fact the liberals abandoned our ally.

My only criticism of Kissinger is it sounds like he was taking the Chicoms way too seriously and talking candidly with them. Let's also remember China fougt a war with Vietnam. The USSR was N Vietnam's real backer. Kissinger was not handing Southeast Asia over to the chicoms, and there was nothing wrong with what he said.

11 posted on 05/26/2006 6:13:37 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Williams

"If the North Vietnamese, on the other hand, engage in serious negotiation with the South Vietnamese and if after a longer period it starts again after we were all disengaged, my personal judgment is that it is much less likely that we will go back again, much less likely."

- - - - - -

This observation could be made by ANYONE (even the Chicoms) that was reading a newspaper at the time. The focus was on getting OUT, not going in. An American VICTORY was secondary. By the way, except for that "negotiation" part, K was right.


13 posted on 05/26/2006 6:17:54 PM PDT by geopyg ("I would rather have a clean gov't than one where -quote- 1st Amend. rights are respected." J.McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

Well, usually you make sense. I'll grant you that.

This article is perfectly accurate in depicting Kissinger as a Metternich of the 20th Century. His policy toward China and Vietnam was evil then and is evil now. You can take the few sentences reported here or his whole record. He should be hung for treason, but we are no longer in that kind of America.


24 posted on 05/26/2006 7:18:39 PM PDT by The Westerner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

It is largely considered fact that Kissenger stalled the peacetalks in 1968 (as chief of negoations) because he knew that Nixon would offer him the job of secretary of state, if he did so. Even the North Vietnam government was surprised when they were ready to sign off on a number of conditions, and Kissenger just went into additional conditions. And the end of the war? It only came when Nixon was ready for it to end...and jump-started the peacetalks by using B-52s and quickly bringing all the players to the table in a very short period of time.

As much as I hate Albright...I think she was more accountable and true to the nation than Kissenger ever was.


40 posted on 05/26/2006 9:08:19 PM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson