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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (241458)	3/24/2002 1:55:53 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

While Vietnam was transformed from a minor detail into a major disaster from the early to the late 60's, it was transformed from major disaster back into a minor detail-and major geo-strategic coup in favor of the US-between 1969 and 1973. The entire Cold War was turned around,-and the Soviet Empire collapsed within twenty years-as a result of the US foreign policy from 1969 forward. This world-changing process was set in motion by one of the few geopolitical visionaries in American history: Richard Nixon. His enemies were the various components of the anti-American left, which seized the Democratic Party in 1970, and who's political fortunes peaked with the corrupt and incompetent Clinton administration of 1993 to 2001. These enemies made their bones by chasing Nixon from office in a minor scandal in 1974, and have been revising history against him ever since. The result is a that a significant portion (though by no means a majority) of the "boomer" generation think of Nixon as a corrupt president, while viewing the lying and lecherous Clinton as unfairly put upon by those who coveted his office. Such historical revisionism cannot survive for more than a generation, and perhaps it's fortunate that the same boomer liberal minority has so destroyed the education system that few members of subsequent generations even recognize the name Nixon (or Vietnam), while they and their children have been made relative experts on oral sex. In any great movement or empire, one can find the intellectual seeds of its own destruction. For the US empire, that is the American left. But since the left's own ideas create the seeds of ITS own destruction, their long-run attempts to destroy us may still ultimately fail...

To: ManyMoose who wrote (241458)	3/24/2002 2:18:11 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 769667

At it's peak of popularity (1970), the so-called "Peace" movement constituted well less than 10% of the younger generation-the ones subject to the draft laws. That the sympathy was even that high was due to the addition of the usual anti-draft and isolationist factions that have existed throughout American history. Thus, despite the 30 years of attempted revisionism, the "Peace" movement was not a mass movement among the population. Having taken over the Democratic Party, they offered traditional isolationist George McGovern for president, and he was dismissed-with prejudice-by 60% of the voters. As for serving, the draft was the draft. Such laws were invented because, as Pasternak so eloquently wrote, "Contented men don't volunteer." In the Vietman era, a few fled, as a few always do. But the rest served when called. It was not, and never will be, as agonizing a choice as many like to claim today. Only phony shitheads like Bill Clinton had the luxury of such posturing. Generals insisted (as they ALWAYS do, even today) that compulsory service is essential to national defense, and disaster is guaranteed to any country that ignores the need for it. Richard Nixon, characteristic of his roll as visionary, led us away from compulsory service, and thus destroyed the most powerful issue of the left at that time. Ironically, they even hated him for that...

To: ManyMoose who wrote (241458)	3/25/2002 2:28:12 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

It's a theoretical thing, it's the time machine/back to the future stuff. LBJ still president, etc, but we are taking our 55-60 year old minds and sticking them back in our bods in '65; the 55 year old self knows that Tonkin was a lie, that MacNamara said it was wrong, that LBJ knew it was a fool's errand, but couldn't avoid it because of domestic concerns, like he couldn't get elected in '64 by appearing to be soft on Communism. Actually, I haven't believed a president since JFK. Ike lied, too (U-2 incident, which I think ended up destroying a summit meeting between Ike and Nicky K), but actually I think he may have been a bit underrated, and he made some very astute observations. Question authority! I expect my government to lie to me; they have been doing it a long time. On second thought, Carter was pretty honest TK