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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Just_Observing who wrote (814)	3/21/2003 10:30:17 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 21614

Interesting point of view..... Mike Thomas Bush follows stunning trail of Nixon, Reagan Published March 20, 2003 Mike Thomas The critics of President George W. Bush paint him as a simplistic, quick-draw cowboy out of touch with the world. But Bush is following a calculated path once taken by Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. I'll start with Nixon. It was 1972, and Nixon was nearing the end of negotiations to stop the Vietnam War. With American troops withdrawing, North Vietnam pressed for an advantage in the talks. An angry Nixon stunned the world by mining Haiphong Harbor, risking a confrontation with the Soviets and beginning the massive "Christmas bombing" campaign. The Soviets were outraged, and our European allies protested. The peace treaty was signed in January 1973. Nixon pulled another surprise during the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Israel and Egypt and Syria. The Arab nations had inflicted huge losses on Israel. Over the objections of Kissinger and other advisers who feared an Arab oil embargo, Nixon ordered a massive airlift to resupply Israel. Israel rebounded and encircled the Egyptian army. To save its ally, the Soviets threatened to intervene. Nixon put the military on DEFCON 3 alert, which included the nuclear forces. The next day, the Soviets backed down and the war quickly ended. Nixon was a wild card the Soviets had no interest in testing. Ronald Reagan assumed that role early in his presidency. The Soviets had begun moving medium-range SS-20 missiles near Europe in the late 1970s, a direct threat to NATO. To counter that, Reagan went ahead with plans to deploy cruise missiles and the Pershing missile in Germany, saying he would halt the deployment only if the Soviets dismantled their missiles aimed at Europe. The Soviets refused unless French and British missiles were dismantled as part of the deal. As the standoff grew more tense, Reagan was attacked here and abroad as a trigger-happy cowboy with little sense of how to conduct diplomacy. His program to pursue Star Wars and modernize our nuclear forces reinforced that view. There were giant demonstrations against the Pershing deployment across Europe. The Soviets saw an opportunity to split NATO. The former director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Herbert Scoville Jr., wrote in the New York Times that Reagan's position was "palpably nonnegotiable" for the Soviets. Reagan did not budge. The Soviets backed down and signed the deal. For the first time, an entire class of nuclear weapons was destroyed. Many historians think Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev put missiles in Cuba because he perceived President Kennedy as weak when the two met for their first summit. That miscalculation almost destroyed the world. Saddam first invaded Kuwait because he miscalculated the response of the elder Bush. Once George W. set out on a path to disarm Saddam, he could not back down or he would be perceived as weak, not only by Saddam but by other adversaries as well. The U.S. war against Iraq is far more than a campaign against one tyrant. It's a message to all of them. Mike Thomas can be reached at 407-420-5525 or mthomas@orlandosentinel.com. orlandosentinel.com