|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 337
CEG\'er
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 337 |
Originally posted by Contouraholic:
Originally posted by gwellington:
Originally posted by Contouraholic:
Vietnam... It was a republican who ended the war (Nixon).
April Fool's day was yesterday.
Not joking. Do you have different information?
Since I enlisted in the Army in 1973 when Nixon ended the war and brought the troops home, I think I have my facts right. The evacuation of troops in Vietnam started in 1973, Nixon was president. So where am I wrong on this?
With all due respect, I would argue that the American People ended the war. Richard Nixon and his Administration were, in my view, intent on continuing the war for as long as possible in the hopes of finding something they could call a "victory." Witness the massive Christmas bombing campaign, and their illegal 1970 "secret" invasion of Cambodia, which caused a backlash leading to the Kent State massacre, and which ultimately turned the tide of opinion among Middle America, who did not look kindly at their children being gunned down on college campuses. My opinion, of course, but I can in no way see Nixon as having "ended" the war.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718 |
Nixon started the pullout from Vietnam in '73. He resigned from office sometime in August of '74, so he wasn't around when the last troops officially left in '75 (Marines at the US Embassy in Saigon, I believe).
Gerald Ford was in office during that time (Republican, as he was the VP under Nixon)...
JaTo
e-Tough Guy
Missouri City, TX
99 Contour SVT
#143/2760
00 Corvette Coupe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,889
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,889 |
Originally posted by Contouraholic:
Originally posted by gwellington:
Originally posted by Contouraholic:
Vietnam... It was a republican who ended the war (Nixon).
April Fool's day was yesterday.
Not joking. Do you have different information?
Since I enlisted in the Army in 1973 when Nixon ended the war and brought the troops home, I think I have my facts right. The evacuation of troops in Vietnam started in 1973, Nixon was president. So where am I wrong on this?
Quote:
Vietnam is not a comparable situation. We lost because the Democrats ran the military by public consensus instead of good military tactics. It was the Democrats who started the police action (JFK) and escalated the war (LBJ). It was a republican who ended the war (Nixon). Hopefully, Bush won't fall into the trap of trying please everyone (especially you).
You don't think Nixon ended the war because of public opinion?
99 Contour Sport SE MTX
KKM filter, B&M shifter
No res, BAT kit
Green car silver hood (because silver is faster)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 375
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 375 |
Originally posted by perry:
I don't want 300,000 jobs. I just want one! 
I'll believe the job market is recovering as soon as I'm employed..
i agree!!!
Alex T.
98.5 Silver Frost CSVT #5510
05 Nissan Frontier Nismo 4x4 6 speed
85 Bronco II 6" lift 302 swap
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117 |
If I lived in Topeka, I'd leave too.
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,469
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,469 |
Originally posted by gwellington:
Witness the massive Christmas bombing campaign, and their illegal 1970 "secret" invasion of Cambodia, which caused a backlash leading to the Kent State massacre, and which ultimately turned the tide of opinion among Middle America, who did not look kindly at their children being gunned down on college campuses. My opinion, of course, but I can in no way see Nixon as having "ended" the war.
What you are really saying is that my uncle Dick actually TRIED to fight the war (that he inherited from the Dems) by FINALLY dealing with the fact that the enemy was using the Cambodian border to play "kill and hide" with our G.I.s, as well as stepping up bombing. Indeed in hindsite, he would have been better off getting us out immediately after taking office. But I think he was trying to avoid the defeat which he knew would be a thorn in our side ever since (certainly it emboldened the communists, contributing to the cold war). That it was an unpopular war was of course not his fault nor his agenda (actually it was counter his US-Chinese relations ajenda).
It is surprising how many young, impressionable liberals, even with a college education in cases, believe that Nixon/Republicans started the war....and are shocked to learn otherwise. Clearly, their history teachers failed them.
But the topic was the economy this time folks..
1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760)
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."
-Soren Kierkegaard (as posted by Jato)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718 |
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Hip Hip Hooray! My fiance got a part time job paying $8.50 an hour with no benefits this week too. She'd been making $35K/yr until 7/02.
Tell her to keep looking, move, or get retrained. I had to do my fair share of shuffling around for a few years; it all depends on your motivation and comfort level. Ultimately, most people settle for what is "convienent" and "easy"; sinking into debt for a Masters or PhD and selling yourself to the best of your abilites usually isn't as fun or rewarding at the beginning as it is a few years down the track.
Adapt or die, so the saying goes...
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
So the economy may limp back into employment just in time for Iraq to blow up in Bush's face. Anyone wanna place bets on whether the ayatollahs in Iraq will really allow the US sponsored interim constitution to stick as it is written now?
Compromise is unavoidable in a situation like this; a basic understanding of diplomacy and our aims and goals would tell your this.
The US will want a government as favorable to our interests as possible, while still preserving the basic freedoms and benefits of democracy for the Iraqis. The Shi'ites of course will do their typical hard-line BS and "Great Satan" shouting, complete with mobs of lemmings appearing on TV demanding an Islamic state...
...which AIN'T gonna happen, partner.
We will meet somewhere in the middle. Why? Well, I guess we could drop protection of the ayatollahs and let the Saddam's remaining Republican Guard wackos keep assassinating them, or we just simply point to who has the biggest guns in the area...
Freedom, no matter how great it is, isn't always fair. 
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Our election does not happen until months after sovereignty is to be passed to the Iraqis. Maybe our rebounding economy will help pay for our keeping forces over there for a full four more years, like members of the senate foreign relations committee co-chaired by Sen. Lugar (R-IN) had surmised.
Better there than yet another dumbass social program that some spendthrift politican decides his district needs so he can get re-elected next term...
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
If that sovereignty change happens around the end of June, lets see how the Dow Jones responds to the ayatollahs around July through October, and then we can discuss our vibrant, healthy economy.
Ok. Quick note, though. The health of the stock market doesn't always a vibrant economy make. It's been going back through the roof in recent months, while a number of people have been whining about job data, pointing to this "jobless recovery" phenomenon.
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Is Condi Rice still focusing on missle defense? (OK, that last one's a cheap shot. That was her focus on 9/10/01. After all, she did change her focus the next day to Iraq. Must have been because of all those Iraqi hijackers.)
If you want to get technical, Afghanistan was the next item on the Adminstration's list, then Iraq...
...but I feel order of importance is entirely lost in this discussion.
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
And while you flame me, quit the "But Clinton messed up on terrorism too" chant.
NEVER. That immense f**k-up of a Commander-in-Chief was more interested in what his figures looked like in the polls than getting down to business and building appropriate responses to a blossoming threat. The SOB gutted the CIA's eyes and ears in the Middle-East, if you care to remember the absolute axing the intelligence budget received under his administration. That move was akin to cutting your staff in half and blinding the one's that remained. I hear constant complaints about what kind of job the CIA has been doing; well, guess what? It's a b**ch doing surveillance with blinders on, both hands tied behind your back and being told who you can and can't "work" with.
All thanks to Mr. Clinton, ladies and gentlemen...
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Clinton's not running in this election packaging himself as a hero in the war on terrorism. (But if you MUST dwell on the past, then how about discussing how Saddam got the gas he used on the Kurds... during the Reagan administration? What was Rumsfeld's job back then?)
IIRC, we only supplied biological agents to Hussein during the Reagan years through an FDA or Dept. of Commerce export program. I think the gas and the materials that made it were of GERMAN or FRENCH origin. Try again...
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Anyway, our show of force did not exactly turn the tide in Vietnam, but here we are again, needing to "win the peace," to "win the hearts and minds." Do you really do that by turning the Middle East into a sea of glass?
I can't imagine a more different theater of conflict than Iraq and Vietnam, at least in the 20th century...
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Enjoy your jobs and contemplate how many MORE enemies we have NOW, swearing to kill us all, than we did one year ago.
Much fewer than before, since we've been bombing the living s**t out of them in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as putting bullets into skulls on the one's we can't bomb. Keeping them on the run is also helping out, too. Is it aggrivating people and many Islamic countries? Absolutely. I don't like that we have to take care of their housekeeping any more than they do...
Welcome to the brave new world; one where no longer do we have the US and Russia keeping everyone in line and in order. I'll agree it's somewhat of a mess, but if you really want to get down to it, blame the fall of Communism for setting off the whole 3-ring circus...
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Between 9/11/01 and 3/03, we had allies newly eager to share intelligence on terrorists.
Define your usage of the word "allies".
If you mean France, Russia and Germany, a quote that Patton once used comes to mind:
"I would rather have 10 German divisions in front of me than a French one behind me"
- Gen. George S. Patton
Originally posted by PDXSVT:
Now we have former allies who are convinced we're liars on a deluded power trip. Thanks George, I feel safer already.
We'll see how their tune changes, because since Spain rolled over, they are seeing more bombs on traintracks. Chirac has France being threatened and put at risk becuase of his incessant flip-flopping, though I can't fault him entirely; France has a history of capitulation (must be something in the food or wine)...
...don't you also find it odd that they had access to pretty much the SAME information as us from '91 onwards on Iraq and came to the EXACT same conculsions, up until the US finally got fed up of playing "pin the tail on the donkey" with Saddam's regime?
JaTo
e-Tough Guy
Missouri City, TX
99 Contour SVT
#143/2760
00 Corvette Coupe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,483
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,483 |
Originally posted by Dan Nixon:
Also, new unemployment claims hit lowest point since 2000 and unemployment rate down to 5.6% support the claim that the anticipated job recovery is comming..
Let's not forget, that when a person's unemployment benefits run out that they are no longer counted as unemployed.
That's a great way to inflate positive stats!
Frank McCoy aka Mod-deth aka Mid Life Crisis aka SVT Doood aka mcgainer is a SCAM ARTIST
Pre98 Zetec - Some Mods
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,506
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,506 |
Perhaps you could more accurately say Nixon admitted defeat in 1973. As he took office in January 1969, it wasn't like he wasn't trying to win the war over the four years in the meantime, unless those pilots and operatives in Laos and Cambodia and the mines in Haiphong harbor had been sent by LBJ but were just "lost" and trying to find their way for four years. Remember RMN's "Peace with Honor" campaign platform? Or how he'd "vietnamize" the war, having the South Viets take over a bigger role? Just like how we'll have an Iraqi police force trained and taking over security in the coming new, stable Iraq. Maybe an Iraqi security force will even work as well as the Egyptian military did when it protected Anwar Sadat on his home soil.
Yeah, 'Nam was waaaay different. We did not have Sunni muslims welcoming us there like we do now in Iraq. We didn't have Shi'ite muslims welcoming us there like we do now in Iraq either. Since everyone in 'Nam was our enemy and everyone in Iraq is our friend, fixing Iraq will be a piece of cake to just wrap it up all nice and tidy like GWB planned when he rolled in the tanks in 3/03, for instant democracy. The outcome will be different because in Iraq we already have the local people on our side. Right?
So you think we don't have ANY additional NEW enemies? How many Iraqi families have killed or maimed relatives? How many "thank you" cards have those families sent us? Even if we are "right" and Al Jazeera's coverage is "wrong", will that matter to the millions of future potential extremists in the muslim world that perceive us as being invaders and occupiers of one of their own countries? The perception IS the reality that counts when it (rightly or wrongly) leads to a new generation of extremists. Is it beyond your imagination that maybe, just maybe, GWB has pissed off moderate arabs/muslims, and that he has made recruiting of new militants by al queda-minded movements easier and more productive? If you think such is NOT the case, then you must also think Hamas is about to give up, out of fear of Sharon and the Israelis. Or maybe all the Hamas members have been killed, and no new recuits will come up to replace their losses. Yep, that will happen any day now...
So you think little of our old allies. GWB said to heck with them when he decided to invade. So why will GWB now try to cajole them into helping to pay to police GWB's mess in Iraq? (We don't want your approval of our policies, just your francs and marks to fund security after we're done playing cowboy.)
You'd tell American taxpayers to pay for YEARS of supporting a coming shaky regime in Iraq while we're running Bush's budget deficits, the baby boomers are starting to retire, and let's give another tax cut to the rich. You must think we're all so rich we did NOT need that money for hunting down terrorists over the rest of the globe and at home, and we didn't need that money for increasing our security everywhere other than in Iraq.
MSDS, SHO-shop Y, custom 2.5" catback; xcal2; 63mm TB, K&N 3530; Koni struts, Aussie bar; THaines forks, Quaife, SpecII, UR fly; DMD; Nima UD pullies; Stazi brakes; f&r Pole120 mounts. Just a daily commuter car. Silver '98 SVT E0 #3159
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,469
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,469 |
Most impressive again JaTo.. Just to add qoute: "Is Condi Rice still focusing on missle defense? (OK, that last one's a cheap shot. That was her focus on 9/10/01. After all, she did change her focus the next day to Iraq. Must have been because of all those Iraqi hijackers." Personnally, I think its not such a bad idea still. We have N. Korea shoting missiles over Japan, probably now have or soon will have Nukes to tip them and actively working on (or may have) capability top hit the US west coast. In case our plan A fails (the 6 way talks)..its good to have a backup. Then there are the unstable former USSR states...some of which have active terrorist groups and could concieveably get control of a silo. Pakistan is nuclear capable, long range missle ready and only a single bullet to Mr. Musharif's head may be keeping militant Islam from the keys to the silos. As for me, I hope someone is thinking about missle defense. We have moved beyond the cold war but new threats are as bad or worse...at least the Soviets understood MAD (mutual assured destruction). I'm not so sure that radical Islam or that Korean nutjob with the bad haircut do. The war on terrorism is 3 dimentional..need to expect the unexpected. I think we'll hear the rest of what Connie Rice was thinking and planning next week...they asked for it and they will get it. I am pretty sure that more serious thought had occured and plans being prepared in the 8 months of Bush's tenure than 8 years under Clinton. Not that this matters...it is clear from every poll that Americans believe by a huge margin that Bush is the prefered guy to deal with terrorists. Kerry NEEDS to sell Americans on a bad economy and blame Bush for it to win....and that is why the 300,000 new jobs is a real kick in the nuts for him. Pity 
1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760)
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."
-Soren Kierkegaard (as posted by Jato)
|
|
|
|
|
