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

To: rlmorel
Ford was a far better man than people give him credit for. He did things I didn’t like as well, but he at least had the guts to pardon Richard Nixon and put it in the rear-view mirror.

Besides, he DID love his country and served with honor, distinction and bravery in WWII.

He didn’t deserve what the moonbat a-hole Chevy Chase did to him. Ford was a good man, a classy guy.

One should not speak ill of the dead, however, the record speaks for itself.

On or about 1975, though I had considered myself a Republican, President Ford's actions (or rather, inaction))left me so disgusted, that I foreswore my allegiance to the Party and have since considered myself an Independent Conservative.

From: A decent Interval / Who Lost Vietnam?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/vietnam2-decent-interval.htm

On June 27, 1973 Nixon vetoed a bill that would have stopped the bombing of the Ho Chi Minh Trail, the North Vietnamese supply lines through Laos and Cambodia. The House had sustained the President's veto. Nixon had denounced the "Cambodia rider,"saying it would "cripple or destroy the chances for an effective negotiated settlement in Cambodia and the withdrawal of North Vietnamese troops,"

On June 29, 1973, Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., rose on the floor of the House of Representatives and made an announcement that left his colleagues stunned. President Richard M. Nixon, Ford said, would sign a bill barring U.S. combat activities in all of Indochina -- North Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and South Vietnamese battlefields. Passage of this bill rendered worthless the promises Nixon had made in person to Thieu that the USwould punish Hanoi for breaches of the cease-fire. The level of violence had greatly intensified in South Vietnam, and this measure was tantamount to giving Hanoi a green light to conquer the country. Nixon later claimed that he had no choice but to accept the all-Indochina ban on U.S. bombing, writing that "it was becoming clear that the antiwar majority in Congress would soon be able to impose its will." The Democratic Congress prohibition on U.S. bombing in all of Indochina could be blamed for Communist victory in Vietnam.

It was soon apparent that even if President Nixon might wish to take military action against North Vietnam, the US Congress would not support him. Increasingly concerned over continuing US air strikes in Cambodia, Congress enacted legislation on 30 June cutting off funds, effective 15 August 1973, for all "combat activities by United States military forces in or over or from off the shores of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia." The President's options for retaliation against North Vietnamese violations of the peace agreement were even further restricted when Congress passed the "War Powers Resolution" on 7 November 1973. This measure required the President to consult with Congress before introducing any US armed forces into hostile situations abroad.

MACV had prepared the South Vietnamese to take up the burden of the territorial security and light infantry war while assuming that American air power would be available to counter a more severe threat, as it had done in 1972. The Paris Agreement and the actions of the Congress took away American support, including air power. It was too late for the drastic changes in forces and strategy that South Vietnam would have needed to survive without the Americans, and it is doubtful whether Saigon's leaders could have conceived and executed such changes even given more time.

During FY 1973, the United States had contributed $2.27 billion for support of the RVNAF. For FY 1974, the Nixon administration sought another $1.6 billion, but Congress authorized only $1.1 billion. This reduction brought predictions of dire consequences. The US Defense Attache n Saigon reported in March 1974 that the RVNAF faced "a fuel and supply famine" while CINCPAC foresaw an "ominous situation in South Vietnam in the immediate future." d had the opportunity to change the nation's course in Vietnam when he assumed the presidency in August 1974. He did not do so, leaving the burden of ending the war to the US Congress.

In September 1974 the U.S. Congress appropriated only $700 million for South Vietnam for FY 1975, instead of the requested $1.0 billion. This left the South Vietnamese Army under-funded and resulted in a decline of military readiness and morale. To accommodate this reduction, stringent measures were implemented to reduce RVNAF operations and tighten its force structure. Numerous VNAF aircraft were deactivated and flying-hours cut by half.

On 18 December 1974, based on President Ford's ineffective response and his hamstringing by Congress, North Vietnam's leaders meet in Hanoi to form a plan for final victory.

The NVA launched the first attack shortly after the first of the year against Phuoc Long Province in MR 3. After a seven-day siege, Phuoc Binh fell on 7 January 1975. After the seizure of the province, Hanoi sat back to judge the American reaction. There was none. On 8 January 1975 the North Vietnamese Politburo ordered a major offensive to "liberate" South Vietnam by NVA cross-border invasion.

Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger testified to Congress on 14 January 1975 that the U.S. was not living up to its earlier promise to South Vietnam's President Thieu of "severe retaliatory action" in the event North Vietnam violated the Paris peace treaty.

But on 21 January 1975 President Ford told a press conference that the United States was unwilling to re-enter the war.

Rather than working out a plan to end the war and remove those South Vietnamese who had worked with the Americans over the years, the Ford administration, led by the President himself, his Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, and Graham Martin, the U.S. ambassador to South Vietnam, chose to pursue a deliberate policy of denial, one designed to place the blame for the loss of South Vietnam on the shoulders of Congress. The resulting tragedy left thousands of Vietnamese to face life as the clear losers in a civil war.

While there is enough blame to go around, most notably, the DEMON-RATS in Congress (thereafter and since, to be known as the Party of Surrender and Defeat) we had a SIGNED Agreement (Paris Peace Accords, in which we PROMISED to come to South Vietnam's defense if No. Vietnam attempted a takeover) which we (read: The WUSS, RINO, Ford) REFUSED to honor and that coupled with our earlier bugout under "Peace with Honor" Tricky Dicky Nixon (aided and abetted by the Scumbag, Globalist Kissinger) started many of us Nam Vets to question "What is all worth it," and "Why did we have to sacrifice (58,000+) military" for naught.

I can GUARANTEE our Military Warriors will in the very near future, be asking themselves same questions about their service (and losses) in Iraq and AfGan.

Likewise, the Iraqis and Afhanis who "TRUSTED" us (FOOLS) and cooperated or worked with us, much like the Hundreds of Thousands of Vietnamese who did the same, will be left hanging and will no doubt suffer the same consequences as the Vietnamese did after the North took over the South....if not worst left to the "tender" mercies (/sarc) of the Islamofascist who will end up controlling both countries

26 posted on 05/13/2012 1:31:53 PM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet (l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Conservative Vermont Vet

I think there is plenty of blame to go around.

But that wasn’t the point I was trying to make.

Was Ford a RINO? Sure. Was Nixon a RINO? Yeah. Was Eisenhower a RINO. Probably.

The only two Presidents in the last century who wouldn’t be called RINO’s were likely Coolidge and Reagan. And on this forum, even then.


33 posted on 05/13/2012 1:59:27 PM PDT by rlmorel ("The safest road to Hell is the gradual one." Screwtape (C.S. Lewis))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet

I think there is plenty of blame to go around.

But that wasn’t the point I was trying to make.

Was Ford a RINO? Sure. Was Nixon a RINO? Yeah. Was Eisenhower a RINO. Probably.

The only two Presidents in the last century who wouldn’t be called RINO’s were likely Coolidge and Reagan. And on this forum, even then.


34 posted on 05/13/2012 1:59:27 PM PDT by rlmorel ("The safest road to Hell is the gradual one." Screwtape (C.S. Lewis))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | 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