Posted on 06/25/2024 9:31:57 AM PDT by RandFan
1968. Nixon said he would end the Viet Nam war. He did.
Let’s say Trump’s peace strategy works. Are we still going to be obligated to send money to Ukraine for decades after that? The money launderers would be happy as long as they got their cut.
Nixon should have acted faster to withdraw from South Vietnam. End the war in 12 months. Withdraw in force.
Balderdash......... he is not able to end the war. He thinks he can make deals but can’t deal with those who make no deals.
It’s Mexico paying for the wall all over again
*1968. Nixon said he would end the Viet Nam war. He did.
Nixon should have acted faster to withdraw from South Vietnam. End the war in 12 months. Withdraw in force.*
The concept was Vietnamization. Took a bit of time. Didn’t work. Then came Kent State-1970.
That was a mistake. Nixon knew we had to get out. But 500,000 American troops were in Vietnam. Of course we couldn't get them out all at once. That's why it should take 12 months to cut our losses and leave. So we'll be out there by 1970.
Probably.
If anything, Russians have negotiated in too much good faith. In particular, they have negotiated with the assumption that their counterparty is negotiating in good faith as well. Unfortunately, the West has not dealt with Russia in good faith in a very long time. See the Minsk Agreements for a great example.
More projection.
We promised the Russians no eastward expansion of NATO in the early 1990s and broke that promise.
We and other NATO countries had Ukraine sign the Minsk Accords, which if they had been implemented would have prevented the present war, and pressured the Ukrainians to renege on it.
Boris Johnson killed a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine in Turkey in 2022.
Kazan replied: More projection.
I reply: You won't find a single Western diplomat who ever negotiated more than a dinner menu with Russians who will tell you they negotiate in good faith. Or tell the truth about it afterward.
Kazan repeats the same old Moscow line about the Minsk Accords. FACTS are wildly different.
https://cepa.org/article/dont-let-russia-fool-you-about-the-minsk-agreements/
Excerpt:
4. Russia is in violation of the Minsk Agreements. The deals require a ceasefire, withdrawal of foreign military forces, disbanding of illegal armed groups, and returning control of the Ukrainian side of the international border with Russia to Ukraine, all of this under OSCE supervision. Russia has done none of this. It has regular military officers as well as intelligence operatives and unmarked “little green men” woven into the military forces in Eastern Ukraine. The LPR and DPR forces are by any definition “illegal armed groups,” that have not been disbanded. The ceasefire has barely been respected by the Russian side for more than a few days at a time.
READ THE WHOLE THING.
More source material refuting Kazan, (as if more were needed) Long read, but crucial facts are embedded:
https://osce.usmission.gov/russias-ongoing-violations-in-ukraine-14/
Yes, do let's look at the Minsk agreements. But I just covered that replying to Kazan.
*The concept was Vietnamization. Took a bit of time. Didn’t work.*
*That was a mistake.*
Nixon left them as one of the most highly armed countries in the world. When the final attack came they dropped their weapons and fled. Wasn’t worth it to them. Corruption.
The US isn’t going to defeat Russia and this is what a Doofus would say.
With what people? The seasoned ones are dead or crippled. What’s left is too old, too young and too inexperienced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.