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


1 posted on 01/30/2007 2:38:30 PM PST by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: presidio9

In 1975, ex-President Nixon aimed his mind control ray at the Democrats in Congress all the way from San Clemente and made them cut off funds to South Vietnam.


2 posted on 01/30/2007 2:42:57 PM PST by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

The left is re-writing history?
I don't think a "thesis" is required to learn the truth, just a review of the facts.
A lying coward, media, and a certain senators actions would be a better thing to spend time studying.


3 posted on 01/30/2007 2:43:51 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

Problem with this scenario is that Kissinger is still alive and he can kick their butts from DC to Timbuktu.


4 posted on 01/30/2007 2:44:52 PM PST by TexanToTheCore (If it ain't Rugby or Bullriding, it's for girls.........................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

"It holds that President Nixon and Henry Kissinger — not the Democratic Congress and public opinion — were chiefly culpable in America's betrayal of South Vietnam."

More lies by these frapping leftists. They never give up, do they? No part of history they won't try to distort or re-write. These people have the mentality of totalitarians, and they will lie consistently and forever to the American public.


5 posted on 01/30/2007 2:47:59 PM PST by popdonnelly (Our first obligation is to keep the power of the Presidency out of the hands of the Clintons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9; SandRat
Everyone who served in Viet Nam KNOWS that the war was lost in America not Viet Nam.

The Lefties can divert the blame all they like but those of us WHO WERE IN VIET NAM and that didn't include the draft dodging Lefties, know better and know the facts who was responsible for losing the war.
6 posted on 01/30/2007 2:49:40 PM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9
About halfway through this book - some very insightful (and new) insights into the Viet Nam war. An eye opener, especially concerning the corrupt reporting from the war zone.
Triumph Forsaken
7 posted on 01/30/2007 2:49:46 PM PST by frankenMonkey (Are there any men left in Washington, or are they all cowards?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

Liars should be treated like liars.


8 posted on 01/30/2007 2:49:50 PM PST by popdonnelly (Our first obligation is to keep the power of the Presidency out of the hands of the Clintons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9
So therefore when the Dems cut off money from our troops in Iraq, it will be President Bush's, VP Cheney's, SoS Rice's and President Nixon's fault? I know those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it, but what about those in Congress and the press who lobotimize themselves and the public to keep history's lessons from being learned?
9 posted on 01/30/2007 2:51:59 PM PST by KarlInOhio (Samoans: The (low) wage slaves in the Pelosi-Starkist complex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

As I recall, in 1975 Gerald Ford was President [and mute] when a DEMOCRAT led Congress cut off the funding, and military supplies promised to the South Vietnamese in '72. But yeah, Nixon did it, fresh from his triumph at the Johnstown flood.


11 posted on 01/30/2007 2:54:25 PM PST by PzLdr ("The Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Darth Vader)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

That agitprop should be shot down pronto.

All necessary is to look at today's Democrat - that's Democrat - manifestations, and view their cowardice, duplicity to achieve any end, and feverish desire to attempt to appease those intent on killing all of us.

They abandoned the S. Vietnamese and Cambodians; they now seek to abandon committed Iraqi allies, and consequently the whole Middle East, for the silver of poliitical opportunism.

The only antidote to their poison is a continuous offensive against them.


12 posted on 01/30/2007 2:55:39 PM PST by mtntop3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9
John Kerry, hanoi jane and the like betrayed the US and Vietnam.
13 posted on 01/30/2007 2:59:33 PM PST by mountainlyons (Hard core conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

This is news? Those of us who were there at the time knew damn well that Kissinger and Le Duc Tho had negotiated a face-saving US surrender. The fact is that neither Kennedy, Johnson nor Nixon had any idea what they wanted out of the Vietnam war -- other than not to be blamed for losing it. The Paris Peace Accords were 'close enough' and we bailed out.

Yes, the media was against us and the Dems were their usual selves... but that all came after three Presidents' utter failure to lead.


15 posted on 01/30/2007 3:26:12 PM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9
"Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia."

"Oceania has never been at war with Eurasia."

16 posted on 01/30/2007 3:30:16 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

Mr. Gitell (gitell.com) is a contributing editor of The New York Sun wrote.

"There is a word for that, and that is betrayal. Without a doubt, Congress felt compelled to follow the public and leave South Vietnam defenseless in 1975. But with the hindsight of history, we know that measures existed that could have preserved the South Vietnamese government without full-scale American redeployment, namely the air war, money, and supplies. Attempts to absolve the 93rd and 94th Congresses and to shift the blame for the final fall of Saigon to Messrs Nixon and Kissinger only cloud today's current leadership from acting wisely as we are challenged by a new and equally savage enemy."


18 posted on 01/30/2007 3:52:31 PM PST by Garvin ("Who Elected The Media Anyway?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9
Silly leftist rationalization that won't stand any historical scrutiny. The final paragraph wraps it up nicely:
There is a word for that, and that is betrayal. Without a doubt, Congress felt compelled to follow the public and leave South Vietnam defenseless in 1975. But with the hindsight of history, we know that measures existed that could have preserved the South Vietnamese government without full-scale American redeployment, namely the air war, money, and supplies. Attempts to absolve the 93rd and 94th Congresses and to shift the blame for the final fall of Saigon to Messrs Nixon and Kissinger only cloud today's current leadership from acting wisely as we are challenged by a new and equally savage enemy.

19 posted on 01/30/2007 3:57:49 PM PST by AgThorn (Bush is my president, but he needs to protect our borders. FIRST, before any talk of "Amnesty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
The importance of this [who abandoned South Viet Nam] argument has to do with the debate that is taking place for the 2008 presidential election.

You got that right! But we have the advantage of "instant" replay to see who's at fault because it's happening again. Different teams, same contact sport.

The left-instigated social turmoil, the Democrat-instigated political clash, the MSM fulmination against a Republican president's war -- all major parts of the late 1960s and early 1970s. The quagmire, in other words.

"The war is a Bush failure!" fulminate the MSM. "The American people are overwhelmingly against the war!"

Soon this generation's John Kerrys will testify to the criminality of U.S. troops and chain of command, often quoting phony verterans of the war -- blatantly arguing for the enemy's position, Rats anodding -- it's called Congressional oversight.

Then violence and a call to end the violence by cutting off funding of the immoral, illegal war that "every" American opposes.

Won't be any violence this time? Oh, yeah? Only Al Gore stopped his Party from fomenting riots to help settle the 2000 elections. "The people have spoken! They want Gore! Stop the violence, Mr. Bush, step aside."

To wit, from David Frums Diary, NOV. 19, 2002: GORE SPEAKS. The words are by Karenna Gore.

He said, "We have to do what's best for the country, and it is not good for the country to have this kind of divisiveness. And he was on the phone, really calling off the dogs. There were people who wanted to fan the ... the flames of the racial issue and have real unrest. And he was on the phone asking them not to, because of what was best for the country not because of what was best for him politically. And that's really who he is. [end excerpt]

Finally, calls to impeach! A 24/7 MSM frenzy reporting the president's "crimes." Then another "Peace with Horror" made under incredible duress.

The left's issue is not the issue. It's a weapon, "issue" after "issue" after "issue."

The only "issue" then as now is "Bring it all down, man."

20 posted on 01/30/2007 4:13:19 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: presidio9

save


21 posted on 01/30/2007 4:14:47 PM PST by larryjohnson (USAF(Ret))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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