The New GOP Betrays America

Newsmax ^ | Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005 | Diane Alden

[neutronsgalore]

"Nixon took enormous heat for it...he didn't have the
poilitical capital EVER to escalate the war or take it north"

Nothing could've stopped him had he made the choice. It would've achieved a considerable amount in a short period of time with some excellent long lasting secondary effects...the continued existance of South Vietnam!

"...that should have been LBJ's goal...but he botched it..."

There's no doubt about that!

"I have no doubt that Nixon would have won the war had he been in charge from the get-go."

Very likely.

[fallujah-nuker]

"Good analysis. You do know the history of that war."

Thanks.

[neutronsgalore]

"If that is true, then Israel was risking destroying itself and plunging the world into nuclear war..."

It was a very successful high-stakes gamble.

[fallujah-nuker]

A lot of Vietnamese I know say things were going OK until JFK supported a coup that ousted Diem in 1963.

[fallujah-nuker]

""If that is true, then Israel was risking destroying itself and plunging the world into nuclear war..."

It was a very successful high-stakes gamble."

Israel was facing destruction anyway, they would have had nothing to lose, the Arabs would have slaughtered every man, woman and child. I doubt the Brezhnev was willing to sacrifice Moscow for Damascus.

[Fledermaus]

U Y

[Tom Thumbs]

Our founding fathers certainly had a way with words, didn't they?

---

It's oft been said that the easiest way to be branded a traitor these days is to go around quoting the words of the founders.

What's new, however, is that the branding irons are being wielded by so-called "conservatives", and used against those who hold to the principles espoused by the founders.

At times like this, I'm glad I'm an old man...

And no, I'm not a Buchananite. How did I vote? I voted for Dubya before I didn't vote for Dubya. And no, I didn't vote for J F'n K [spit] either.

[Cincinna]

George W. Bush and the "neo-cons" and um... Israel?
responsible for the ills of Americas.
Talk about your wing-nut fringe.

[Tom Thumbs]

This attitude goes directly against the mission statement of Free Republic.

_____Give me an example, please.

---

PMJI...

"As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty."

[FBD]

>"What's new, however, is that the branding irons are being wielded by so-called "conservatives", and used against those who hold to the principles espoused by the founders."<

So true. In his farewell address; George Washington warned that political parties could end up being a threat to our Republic, in that the parties would abandon principals for power. he also warned that they would be subject to influenced by foreign powers.

Also, these days, oppose anything a large corporation wants to do, and you're branded anti-Republican, anti-business, and a Communist.

As an example, I think that Loral & Hughes & comp. etc sold us down the river by giving satellite technology to the PRC.

And for that, I'm "anti-business"

[Tom Thumbs]

As I said in my first post, let the Bushbackers begin. The "vote Republican at all cost" crowd, who , rather than engage in intelligent conversation/making points, just hurl personal insults. I've been registered as a Repub since about 1993 (the Kilintons converted me), but....if the Republican party , now infested with RHINOS, continues to persue its present course, I'm going Libertarian. Guess they don't have to worry about my vote, according to some FR members. Fine, so be it. Because they won't get it

---

I've decided to take the advice not to waste my vote on a third party candidate. In fact, I'm so impressed by that logic, that I've decided not to waste my vote on ANY candidate.

Unless and until I find a candidate that will walk the walk, not nust talk the talk, I won't be wasting my vote anymore. Besides, my knees could use a sabbatical to heal up from all that broken glass...

[Tom Thumbs]

Also, these days, oppose anything a large corporation wants to do, and you're branded anti-Republican, anti-business, and a Communist.

As an example, I think that Loral & Hughes & comp. etc sold us down the river by giving satellite technology to the PRC.

And for that, I'm "anti-business"

---

Illegitimus Non Carborundum.

[GiovannaNicoletta]

read later

[Tom Thumbs]

There is a lot of truth to what you say. I read a book published in 1964 by the CFR about the Panama Canal that advocated giving the canal to Panama. Public opinion was strongly against it, but the will of the CFR prevailed.

The doctrine of containment was first published in the CFR quarterly "Foreign Affairs" in July of 1947 in an article titled "The Sources of Soviet Conduct," written by George Kennan using "X" as his nom de plume.

---

And let's not forget that charming little bit about how, "the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."

[Tom Thumbs]

You don't speak for any evangelicals.

---

And I suppose YOU do?

"Wouldn't you hate to wake up each morning next to that bitch." --bayourod, post #35, this thread.

[Bushbacker]

And surely trying to defeat RINOs of your ilk.

00___Gee, that would be news to the other people in the conservative GOP splinter group I belong to...where we even run our own candidates against the party picks...

[Bushbacker]

Israel was facing destruction anyway, they would have had nothing to lose, the Arabs would have slaughtered every man, woman and child. I doubt the Brezhnev was willing to sacrifice Moscow for Damascus

___How can you believe that Nixon would have stood by and allowed the Arabs to do that?

I think that Israel's nuclear brinkmanship was an evil gambit...if true...and I just don't believe it...Nixon made it clear he was willing to resupply the IDF...Nixon saved Israel.


I knew a former IDF officer..he told me that Israel was in total panic, and was falling apart under pressure from the Arabs..and he doesn't know how they would have survived without American help.

Whhich also points up the fact that without Egypt and Jordan as belligerents, Israel can't be defeated by any band of Hamas terrorists..especially with Iraq
sidelined...that's why Sharon can take a risk like Gaza...or deal with Abbas.

[Countyline]

"Where are the conservatives"?

---

Apparently not willing to join the fight and run for office; nor receive all the scathing attacks that true conservatives receive. Ridicule, denigration, lies presented about them, etc. We are in a down hill dive ... plummeting along ... while we worry about what TV shows to watch.

[Countyline]

interesting read ...unfortunately ... right on

[Psion]

On a similar note...though I think I messed up the post..

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1463857/posts