Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (19450)	7/26/2001 7:25:04 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Although I do not entirely disagree with you, I should say that we came up against the limits of American resolve, rather than American power. As a nation, we were not willing to commit the resources, or pursue the strategy, necessary to turn the situation around.......

To: Dayuhan who wrote (19450)	7/26/2001 8:15:16 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Vietnam was a nit when it was handed to JFK and then to LBJ. It was hardly that when Nixon got it. When Ford got it, it was a nit once again. And when Carter became President it was no longer an issue at all. Was the escalation inevitable? I'd say that first the question "Is anything in history inevitable?" must be answered. If the answer is yes, then it would make no difference who was President. But I think a good argument can be made that it was not. I think the odds of avoiding that escalation would have been improved (although by no means reduced to zero) if a Republican had succeeded Kennedy. Why? Because LBJ was subject to the "soft on Communism" charge if he pulled out and he knew it. All Democrats were. In general, Republicans cannot be painted with that brush. An example of this is the long-debated normalization of relations with China. It took almost 30 years to do this and it was done a Republican (Nixon) whose anti-Communist credentials were impeccable. There's actually a general principle at work here: If you want to get something done in politics, get the party that is traditionally AGAINST it to do it. The other party wants it, so they will not oppose it. And your own party is hesitant to attack because you are one of theirs. No one could credibly claim Nixon was "soft on Communism". No one could accuse him of being a Communist agent or under Communist influence. And that also helped Nixon pull out of Vietnam without anything like a victory. (The fact that a large fraction of the population was sick and tired of it and a small fraction was ready to launch a war on the government helped too.) Maybe the partisanness of politics is what got us into the Vietnam mess. It was inevitable that we would come up against the limits of American power Yes. And now that we've "defeated" the USSR, I think our current hubris is going to lead us into another quagmire. If we're lucky. If not, it will lead us to disaster.