. . . But eventually the framework for a ceasefire was hammered out and by the end of 1968 with US Presidential elections looming, it looked like President Johnson had brokered an end to the conflict – one that would allow both North and South Vietnam to continue on as separate and distinct nations, much like North and South Korea. Sadly however the tide of history often turns on the actions of a ruthless and selfish few. A peaceful end to the war and a triumphant return of American troops would hand Johnson, and by extension Hubert Humphrey and the Democrats, an enormous political victory and most likely the election. And how different would our world be today if that had been the case? Instead, Republican presidential candidate and senator from California, Richard Nixon, faced with likely defeat in the coming election, ordered his liaison to the South Vietnam government, Anna Chennault, to sabotage the pending deal. more . . .
Even for you, this is embarrassing. The subtitle of the blog this comes from reads:" Don't just embrace the crazy, sidle up next to it and lick its ear." This article seems to be an example of that philosophy. The author is some nutcase living in Alaska. His screed is largely unsourced and ignores vast amounts of history, particularly the democrats' obsession with losing the vietnam war and blaming it on Nixon, their hated adversary and staunch anti-communist.
There's more evidence that Johnson said "i'll have those niggers voting democrat for the next 200 years" than that he ever came close to brokering a peace deal.
I agree. Democrats wanted to sell out south vietnam and hand it over to the communists. Anna Chennault knew all about that from what happened with Mao in china. Nixon secured a peace deal in the face of non stop attemps to undermine our troops by democrats in congress. When the north broke the terms of the treaty, democrats refused to aid South Vietnam, leaving them to face a bloodbath. The whole mess was instigated by JFK, LBJ and the criminally incompetent Sec. of Defense Robert McNamara, all democrats. Nixon inherited a quagmire and faced the choice of ignominious surrender or trying to achieve some measure of peace with dignity. Those are the facts.
from the link of dbphoenix I am, of course, ultimately talking about forty-seven US Senators, backed by their conservative masters, who attempted to sabotage the P5+1 talks with Iran and that country’s nuclear program solely, solely, in order to embarrass and insult Barack Obama. These people are so blinded with partisan fanaticism that they actually believe Iran is a greater threat to Western civilization than a bitterly divided United States.
Are you referring to Ted Kennedy? http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/te...eagan-opinions-columnists-peter-robinson.html Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy. “On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.” Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.” Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers. First he offered to visit Moscow. “The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda. Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”
It appears you're too young to remember as well. Are conservatives as anti-education as they are anti-science?
DB, are you re-writing history again to pretend that Kennedy did not try to get cozy with Andropov? Thereby trying to under-cut Reagan. This is a documented historical fact.