Bob Hope on Democrats

[guyone]

:lol:

[White_Male_Canada]

..

[guyone]

If they only would wake up.

[White_Male_Canada]

" I love the dead."

[guyone]

In light of tonights festivities...

[chefmike]

:roll:

[trish]

who's bob hope?? how old are you guys???

[guyone]

19

[White_Male_Canada]

who's bob hope?? how old are you guys???

We`re wiser too. 8)

[trish]

nineteen! shouldn't you be out fighting a war?

[guyone]

I haven't been called up yet.

[specialk]

nineteen! shouldn't you be out fighting a war?

19 isn't old enough to be in this web site....Get Out!!!!!!!!

[trish]

I haven't been called up yet.

i know that's a joke. but really...don't be a coward...sign up. you're for the war right? don't let others fight it for you. it's your cause. it's your calling. Everybody...stand up while neo here solemnly walks his ass to the recruiting station.

[chefmike]

YOU HEARD THE LADY, PYLE!!

NOW START MARCHING, GOMERONE!!

MOVE IT, PYLE!!

MOVE IT, MOVE IT, MOVE IT!!!!

[guyone]

Allright. I will. I'll go to the recruiting office tomorrow & sign up.

[chefmike]

Allright. I will. I'll go to the recruiting office tomorrow & sign up.

Don't forget to take WMC and TFool with you...oh that's right...WMC is a foreigner, isn't he?

[guyone]

Why don't you come along too? It'll be fun!

[trish]

You'll find out how much fun it is...if you really do sign up. you are signing up, right? have you been yet? to the recruiter that is?

nineteen! shouldn't you be out fighting a war?


We are fighting a war.

[chefmike]

nineteen! shouldn't you be out fighting a war?


We are fighting a war.

The only war that you are fighting is with reality, T Fool....you clueless jackass...

You have never served in the military, have you TFarce?

Nor have the chickenhawk war profiteers that you grovel, bow, and scrape before... you pathetic dupe.

You are irrelevant.

nineteen! shouldn't you be out fighting a war?


We are fighting a war.

The only war that you are fighting is with reality, T Fool....you clueless jackass...

You have never served in the military, have you TFarce?

Nor have the chickenhawk war profiteers that you grovel, bow, and scrape before... you pathetic dupe.

You are irrelevant.

Ok, let's recap what the sheep says-


"The only war you are fighting is with reality"

LOL, were it not for Asthma and reactive airways disease, I would've been in the military.

But alas, God put me where I need to be.... Here at home, fighting climate perverts and libtards driving gas guzzlers and Lear Jets.

I know you're bitter that now you've got to sack up and face a real man like me because you know, you can't just tuck it away anymore, bitch. You Baby boomers are dieing off and not a moment too soon. You're so brainwashed by your hippie counter culture that you're the one having a hard time distinguishing fact from reality.

Really, at your old age, isn't the "Fight the MAN, Bring down the establishment" act getting old? Or is it that you still haven't grown up?


And I'll ignore the rest of your idiocy.

[guyone]

Hey when are we all going to sign up? I've been hangin' around all day waiting. When are you guys going to show up?

[White_Male_Canada]

I haven't been called up yet.

i know that's a joke. but really...don't be a coward...sign up. you're for the war right? don't let others fight it for you. it's your cause. it's your calling. Everybody...stand up while neo here solemnly walks his ass to the recruiting station.

We`ve been through this a million times:

" Why don`t you serve if you believe in the liberation of Iraq. You`re a chickenhawk if you don`t serve" is what you`re saying. Apart from the division of labor, a concept that may be novel to you, I`ve said it before and paste it again:

By "chickenhawk" you imply that only those with combat experience have the moral authority or the necessary understanding to advocate military force. Therefore,if only left to the Armed Forces,the USA would be more hawkish and Conservative.

So if only those who served in the miltary have the sole moral authority to back a war,then only those who served in the miltary and war, have the authority to oppose war.That would therefore exclude about 90% of the left.

You mindlessly endorse the idea of a military autocracy, juntas, where military experience is a prerequisite in determining the policies of a country.

[trish]

if only left to the Armed Forces,the USA would be more hawkish and Conservative.

you'd think so...but the military resisted entering into fiasco every step of the way...except for the generals handpicked by bushy and cheeeeeny.


You mindlessly endorse the idea of a military autocracy, juntas, where military experience is a prerequisite in determining the policies of a country.

add the executive branch (as long as it's occupied by the right) to military autocracy and the above pretty much characterizes your position.

i never said military service gave anyone moral authority. nor did i say you and neo were "chickenhawks". I am saying

YOU'RE COWARDS.

that's all. hey...you might still have a lot of moral authority. shit...take all the moral authority you want. it has nothing to do with the fact that you're COWARDS. you've weighed the rewards against the risks and decided to let others fight the war you support.

neo, want's to know why i don't sign up.

1. i don't believe we should be there.
2. i'm not afraid to fight them here instead of there...with intelligent diplomatic, economic and political policies.
3. i'm a COWARD too. i don't want to die for Halliburtin. Nor do i want to be tortured in a civil war between sheite and sunni so bush can save face. Nor do i want anybody else to make these sorts of sacrifices on my behalf. Because dying in Iraq doesn't serve me or American interests in any way shape or form in spite of what bush and cheney say.
4. besides, dick doesn't want me there; i'm a chick with a dick.

[guyone]

It's always the same thing.

We have the moral right to take out right wing governments that commit atrocities yet leave the left wing one's alone. After all if a left wing government is committing atrocities they must have good reason.

Case in point Cuba, Cambodia, Iraq...etc.

It's always the same thing.

We have the moral right to take out right wing governments that commit atrocities yet leave the left wing one's alone. After all if a left wing government is committing atrocities they must have good reason.

Case in point Cuba, Cambodia, Iraq...etc.

The good reason-

[trish]

that's cute. neo's going to sidestep the uncomfortable question of his cowardice and complain that right wing governments that commit atrocities have rights too. is that out of the blue or what? well i agree. we shouldn't be in the business of militarily toppling any governments. issue settled. now go enlist.

[trish]

So the reason for your general retardedness has been revealed...

TFan, if you're going to insult someone....try to have a real point and keep it above the elementary school level. not a rule...just some face saving advise.

So the reason for your general retardedness has been revealed...

TFan, if you're going to insult someone....try to have a real point and keep it above the elementary school level. not a rule...just some face saving advise.

I don't know if you suffer from ADHD or something (not that there's anything wrong with that, just take your meds), but the quote you cited has nothing to do with me.

It's always the same thing.

We have the moral right to take out right wing governments that commit atrocities yet leave the left wing one's alone. After all if a left wing government is committing atrocities they must have good reason.

Case in point Cuba, Cambodia, Iraq...etc.

The good reason-

The pic below is of Donald Rumsfeld meeting Saddam Hussein on 19 December - 20 December 1983. Rumsfeld visited again on 24 March 1984; the same day the UN released a report that Iraq had used mustard gas and tabun nerve agent against Iranian troops. The NY Times reported from Baghdad on 29 March 1984, that "American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with Iraq and the U.S., and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been established in all but name."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran-Iraq_war


We have no permanent allies, only permanent interests. Shutting down Iran remains a permanent interest.

You failed to do anything other that post the Sunday funnies and insult. In other words, you have failed.

[White_Male_Canada]

if only left to the Armed Forces,the USA would be more hawkish and Conservative.


you'd think so...but the military resisted entering into fiasco every step of the way...except for the generals handpicked by bushy and cheeeeeny.

Balderdash. You now state that the active duty military resisted every step of the way. I`ll expect, no DEMAND, links and statistical data to prove that. Much like the co2 concentrations are exponential opinion, I doubt you can prove this claim also.

You mindlessly endorse the idea of a military autocracy, juntas, where military experience is a prerequisite in determining the policies of a country



add the executive branch (as long as it's occupied by the right) to military autocracy and the above pretty much characterizes your position.

Another ignorant american. You don`t know much about your own Constitution do you. Start with Article II Sect. II. Your selective memory gambits won`t work with me girl. Clinton attacked a country. A country that did nothing to the USA. Clinton attacked that country with NO Congressional resolution, none.

The rest of your post is merely trivial emotional opinion so I find no need to comment.

[trish]

:) OOPS!!! :oops: my bad.

apologies to TFan and I_love_Cristina_Bianchini

[dgtlmstry]

who's bob hope?? how old are you guys???

We`re wiser too. 8)



Sure you are

[White_Male_Canada]

who's bob hope?? how old are you guys???

We`re wiser too. 8)



Sure you are

Hey, congratulations. They let you and the rest of the Baader-Meinhof Red-Army Faction out of jail early ! Wooo-hoooo !!!

[trish]

You now state that the active duty military resisted every step of the way. how you love to misrepresent WMC. i think everyone here but you understood by context the meaning of "military" in my assertion...which is still unrefuted.

WMC claims

if only left to the Armed Forces,the USA would be more hawkish

when you say "Armed Forces" here do you mean the leadership or the active duty soldiers? if it was left to the active duty military you may be surprised by how hawkish they aren't. if you mean the leadership, we know only the handpicked few were behind bush.


I`ll expect, no DEMAND, links and statistical data to prove that.

get a hold of yourself, professor, and yank.

[guyone]

if you mean the leadership, we know only the handpicked few were behind bush.

You read this in Pravda?

[guyone]

At least I support my country not try to tear it down.

[trish]

don't confuse supporting the right wing neo-cons and the bushies with supporting your country.

[guyone]

...and I'm not going to confuse bolshevik propaganda with America's core values either.

[LTR_Seeker]

Bob Hope legendary comedian from the golden age of hollywood beloved to his passing away at age 100

[svenson]

At least I support my country not try to tear it down.

Constructive criticism is not trying to tear down your country, its trying to improve it, something the right-wing has never understood. [size=18][b]

more tru of the rightwing on HA than anywhere they just dont get what most in US and rest of world see so clear.

[White_Male_Canada]

Bob Hope legendary comedian from the golden age of hollywood beloved to his passing away at age 100

Bob Hope implied that Democrats didn't support the troops when he joked to the troops in Vietnam: "The country is behind you 50 percent."

[insert_namehere]

Bob Hope legendary comedian from the golden age of hollywood beloved to his passing away at age 100

Bob Hope implied that Democrats didn't support the troops when he joked to the troops in Vietnam: "The country is behind you 50 percent."
Geez.... talk about assumptive and not even CLOSE to the tenor of the country at the time.

Who did the Dems run in '68? Daley's thugs took over the convention floor in Chicago to make SURE McCarthy's workers would be hamstrung. As a result, they got Hubert Humphey - who was SOLIDLY behind Johnson's idea of the war.

In '72, it came down to Muskie... again, another Dem solidly behind the war.

By that time Nixon himself was jabbering on about "peace with honor".

You really need to stop looking at things as either "Dems do dis" and "Repubs do dat".

The world is really much more complex.

[White_Male_Canada]

Geez.... talk about assumptive and not even CLOSE to the tenor of the country at the time.

You really need to stop looking at things as either "Dems do dis" and "Repubs do dat".

Me?

I quoted Bob hope.

Newsflash, I`m not Bob Hope and Bob is dead.

[guyone]

The world is black & white.

It is the cunning strategy of the wiley bolshevik to make it appear as shades of grey.

[insert_namehere]

"The country is behind you 50 percent."
This is the Bob Hope quote.



Bob Hope implied that Democrats didn't support the troops when he joked to the troops in Vietnam:
This is you interpreting it to mean Democrats.

[White_Male_Canada]

"The country is behind you 50 percent."
This is the Bob Hope quote.



Bob Hope implied that Democrats didn't support the troops when he joked to the troops in Vietnam:
This is you interpreting it to mean Democrats.

Naturally it is safe to assume the 50% against victory were Republicans/sarc off.

We all are well aware of the timeline. JFK committed troops to Vietnam. LBJ ran an incremental ineffectual war run from McNamara`s chalkboard equations.

In 1973, after Nixon approved the Paris Peace Accords, congress cutoff all funding for US military forces in or over or from the shore of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia, the Case-Church Amendment.

Case-Church passed by a vote of 278-124 in the House of Representatives and 64-26 in the Senate.

Now, let`s look at congress at the time:

House - 242 Democrats, 192 Republicans.
Senate - 54 Democrats, 44 Republicans.

Safe to say that most likely, 100% of democrats were against the troops, south vietnam and victory. 8)

[insert_namehere]

Naturally it is safe to assume the 50% against victory were Republicans/sarc off.
Naturally, it ISN'T safe to assume that. Even Goldwater had had it with the war by '73.

After the Tet offensive in '68, it became apparent to larger and larger numbers of Americans that Vietnam was an unwinnable war. Bobby Kennedy and later Eugene McCarthy used the rising tide in the country to TROUNCE old-line Dem hacks in the primaries. Nixon tried to leverage "the Silent Majority"... which was around until the full investigation of My Lai Massacre and in '71 the release of the Pentagon Papers. By that point, the whole damned war administration was on the ropes. "Vietnamization", détente, and becoming buddies with China was Nixon's NEW plan for "peace with honor".

The Case-Church Amendment is nearly irrelevant to the argument since the more TELLING indicator of the mood of the country is that the Dems picked up 2 seats in the Senate and a dozen in the house in the '72 election. Nixon wasn't up to his asshole in Watergate prevarication and stalling yet, Kissinger had an accord in principle and there were more troops being cycled home than there were heading over.

WHY? Simple... not everyone who VOTES a Democrat into office IS a friggin' Democrat. There's a WHOLE lot of independents in the United States and when an issue is as BIG, UGLY and plain BRUTAL as Vietnam wound up being... they vote.

[chefmike]

Naturally it is safe to assume the 50% against victory were Republicans/sarc off.
Naturally, it ISN'T safe to assume that. Even Goldwater had had it with the war by '73.

After the Tet offensive in '68, it became apparent to larger and larger numbers of Americans that Vietnam was an unwinnable war. Bobby Kennedy and later Eugene McCarthy used the rising tide in the country to TROUNCE old-line Dem hacks in the primaries. Nixon tried to leverage "the Silent Majority"... which was around until the full investigation of My Lai Massacre and in '71 the release of the Pentagon Papers. By that point, the whole damned war administration was on the ropes. "Vietnamization", détente, and becoming buddies with China was Nixon's NEW plan for "peace with honor".

The Case-Church Amendment is nearly irrelevant to the argument since the more TELLING indicator of the mood of the country is that the Dems picked up 2 seats in the Senate and a dozen in the house in the '72 election. Nixon wasn't up to his asshole in Watergate prevarication and stalling yet, Kissinger had an accord in principle and there were more troops being cycled home than there were heading over.

WHY? Simple... not everyone who VOTES a Democrat into office IS a friggin' Democrat. There's a WHOLE lot of independents in the United States and when an issue is as BIG, UGLY and plain BRUTAL as Vietnam wound up being... they vote.

How would log-cabinboy know?

He's nothing more than a chickenshit chickenhawk who doesn't know shit from shinola.

[White_Male_Canada]

After the Tet offensive in '68, it became apparent to larger and larger numbers of Americans that Vietnam was an unwinnable war.

The dominant media and the left made it appear as if Tet was a battle lost by the US Armed forces, which it was not. Once again, the left molding their opinion to become reality.


The Case-Church Amendment is nearly irrelevant to the argument...

Nearly irrelevant!? They defunded support for South Vietnam while China and the USSR were flowing tons of support into the North. Congress gave up and the result was millions of dead. Nearly irrelevant? It`s the central point and eerily similar to what the left is all about today.


WHY? Simple... not everyone who VOTES a Democrat into office IS a friggin' Democrat. There's a WHOLE lot of independents in the United States ...

Ok. So it was leftists and those who are lead by public opinion. The ones who normally pay scant attention to detail, the "moderates" or of no party affiliation.

[White_Male_Canada]

How would log-cabinboy know?

He's nothing more than a chickenshit chickenhawk who doesn't know shit from shinola.

Pipe down chicken-chicken demorat.

You got nuthin, . In fact, less than nothing ya old fart. Now get your grumpy withered flat ass and atrophied pea-brain outta here. 8)

Thomas Sowell pegged you morons:

The liberals' favorite argument is that there is no argument --nothing uttered in opposition to liberal beliefs exists, at least nothing worthy of their intellectual engagement. Thus a la Al Gore they proceed to reiterate their point of view boldly, heroically, and with the insistence that no other point of view is worthy of notice.

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. then expounded a little more about you creatures:

The liberals' favorite debate is no debate unless the forum is totally dominated by them. Even then there will preferably be no argument, just the liberal point of view sedulously propounded in a forum shaped completely by them. This, students of rhetoric and knowledgeable of 20th century European history will tell you, is called propaganda. The Nazis mastered such forums, as did the Communists.

[Quinn]

Naturally it is safe to assume the 50% against victory were Republicans/sarc off.
Naturally, it ISN'T safe to assume that. Even Goldwater had had it with the war by '73.

After the Tet offensive in '68, it became apparent to larger and larger numbers of Americans that Vietnam was an unwinnable war. Bobby Kennedy and later Eugene McCarthy used the rising tide in the country to TROUNCE old-line Dem hacks in the primaries. Nixon tried to leverage "the Silent Majority"... which was around until the full investigation of My Lai Massacre and in '71 the release of the Pentagon Papers. By that point, the whole damned war administration was on the ropes. "Vietnamization", détente, and becoming buddies with China was Nixon's NEW plan for "peace with honor".

The Case-Church Amendment is nearly irrelevant to the argument since the more TELLING indicator of the mood of the country is that the Dems picked up 2 seats in the Senate and a dozen in the house in the '72 election. Nixon wasn't up to his asshole in Watergate prevarication and stalling yet, Kissinger had an accord in principle and there were more troops being cycled home than there were heading over.

WHY? Simple... not everyone who VOTES a Democrat into office IS a friggin' Democrat. There's a WHOLE lot of independents in the United States and when an issue is as BIG, UGLY and plain BRUTAL as Vietnam wound up being... they vote.

How would log-cabinboy know?

He's nothing more than a chickenshit chickenhawk who doesn't know shit from shinola.

LMFAO..............

-Quinn

[svenson]

How would log-cabinboy know?

He's nothing more than a chickenshit chickenhawk who doesn't know shit from shinola.

[b] Pipe down chicken-chicken demorat.

You got nuthin, . In fact, less than nothing ya old fart. Now get your grumpy withered flat ass and atrophied pea-brain outta here. 8)

this from a person evryon ignores becase he is like jamie michele. evryon is right about you

[White_Male_Canada]

How would log-cabinboy know?

He's nothing more than a chickenshit chickenhawk who doesn't know shit from shinola.

[b] Pipe down chicken-chicken demorat.

You got nuthin, . In fact, less than nothing ya old fart. Now get your grumpy withered flat ass and atrophied pea-brain outta here. 8)

this from a person evryon ignores becase he is like jamie michele. evryon is right about you


Thomas Sowell pegged you morons:

The liberals' favorite argument is that there is no argument --nothing uttered in opposition to liberal beliefs exists, at least nothing worthy of their intellectual engagement. Thus a la Al Gore they proceed to reiterate their point of view boldly, heroically, and with the insistence that no other point of view is worthy of notice.

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. then expounded a little more about you creatures:

The liberals' favorite debate is no debate unless the forum is totally dominated by them. Even then there will preferably be no argument, just the liberal point of view sedulously propounded in a forum shaped completely by them. This, students of rhetoric and knowledgeable of 20th century European history will tell you, is called propaganda. The Nazis mastered such forums, as did the Communists.

[insert_namehere]

Nearly irrelevant!? They defunded support for South Vietnam while China and the USSR were flowing tons of support into the North. Congress gave up and the result was millions of dead.
Hyperbole, unless you're inclined to look at wildly exaggerated numbers. Oh wait, that's right - at that time the Pentagon LOVED wildly exaggerated numbers. Still, let's look at what the Webster's New World Dictionary of the Vietnam War has to say:
US Deaths and MIA: 58,159
South Vietnamese: 224,000
(they don't list VPA and NLF but estimates range from 440,000 to 660,000)
Granted, if you want to list what happened in Cambodia, Laos and Thialand, you hop into millions - add to that our attempts to de-stabilize Cambodia which opened things up for the Kmer Rouge and Pol Pot and you can toss several more million into the body count. Gee, I can't imagine WHY Congress wouldn't want to keep funding such a well conceived and executed military action.


Nearly irrelevant? It`s the central point and eerily similar to what the left is all about today.
Here's General Westmoreland's take on Case-Church: "By the end of the summer of 1973 I thought it was virtually impossible for So. Vietnam to survive. How in the heck could they? Napoleon wrote that on the battlefield, morale is to materiel as three is to one. And sometimes it is even more important-four to one or five to one. And Cong- was cutting into both the morale and the materiel for the South Vietnamese."

Granted, he'd retired in '72 but wrote in an editorial to the New York Times: "that an early peace in IndoChina was merely an illusion and that a viable cease-fire in Vietnam was not a realistic prospect."

While he didn't agree with the Case-Church Amendment and in '75 actually asked Ford to try to overturn it, at the same time, in his memoirs, he had THIS to say: "The Paris Accord had been signed and the President, well aware of the political liabilities of our continuing presence in Vietnam, began cycling troops home. This good faith effort, he felt would advance his cause of detente with the Soviet Union, as well as accerate the process of rapproachment with China. When the Congress of the United States passed the Case-Church Amendment, it was of little importance until early '75 when the NV violated the PA as it seemed they had little to fear from us."

The one thing he failed to mention, however is that Nixon KEPT arguing to congressional committees that he WAS, in fact, turning the war over to the South Vietnamese. "Vietnamization" was a horrible failure, as evidenced by the fall of Saigon. If Case-Church hadn't been in place, Ford would have had to re-esculate the war effort immediately after taking office. We can all play "what if" until the cows come home, but at some point you have to recognize a lost cause for exactly what it is. Westmoreland did, Nixon did, and Congress did.


Ok. So it was leftists and those who are lead by public opinion. The ones who normally pay scant attention to detail, the "moderates" or of no party affiliation.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but this sort of sounds like "if you're not a conservative, you're a sheep". If you look at the state-by-state breakdown in '72, there were a number of conservatives that became the swing vote to bounce their own conservative representation OUT of Congress.

[guyone]

Pure bolshevism.

[insert_namehere]

Pure bolshevism.
Read "A Bright and Shining Lie" by Neil Sheehan and get back to me on that statement, okee dokee?

Shorthand, it's a biography of John Paul Vann, Lieutenant Colonel DFC and Medal of Freedom recipient. As both a military officer on tour of duty in Vietnam (1962/63) and civilian military advisor to the ARVN (1965-72) he became more and more critical of US involvement in bolstering the corrupt Thieu Government, as well as what he percieved to be misleading efforts on the part of the military at home to justify the war.

"If it were not for the fact that Vietnam is but a pawn in the larger East-West confrontation, and that our presence here is essential to deny the resources of this area to Communist China, then it would be damned hard to justify our support of the existing government."

He was killed in the battle of Kopntum.

Seriously, read it - It will definately break your heart, and possibly open your eyes a bit.

Oh, by the way, did you happen to know that notorious libtard Daniel Ellsberg was a Marine Corps Commander for 2 years in Vietnam, served in the Pentagon for 2 years under Defense Secretary Macnamara, was an analyst for the Rand Corporation on Vietnam and then served 2 years in the State department, again in Vietnam? Committed Cold Warrior, dude.

But, yes - he leaked the Pentagon Papers. Must have been shot with some weird bolshevik mind-ray, huh? I mean, up until that point, just like John Paul Vann - he was a right guy. Of course, both of them made these wussed arguments that the lying, cynicism and sheer bullheaded folly of the Pentagon at that time was something the American people needed to know about.

God, what a loser, eh?

[chefmike]

And now we have Watergate Redux in yet another repug oval office...only this time it's about missing e-mails, not missing tape... :P 8)

You log-cabinboys must be so proud of your leaders.... :lol: :P

[White_Male_Canada]

They defunded support for South Vietnam while China and the USSR were flowing tons of support into the North. Congress gave up and the result was millions of dead.


Hyperbole, unless you're inclined to look at wildly exaggerated numbers. .

Westmorland:

"Militarily, you must remember that we succeeded in Vietnam. We won every engagement we were involved in out there."

And that, is no exaggeration.

Nearly irrelevant? It`s the central point and eerily similar to what the left is all about today.


Here's General Westmoreland's take on Case-Church: "By the end of the summer of 1973 I thought it was virtually impossible for So. Vietnam to survive....



The Tet loss for the north was achieved with the SV army at only about 50% due to holiday leave. That drunk commie luvin` bastard Kennedy piled on and had passed a $266 million cut in supplemental spending for Vietnam, and funds were slashed, selling out SV who were perfectly capable of defending themselves with the right arms. This leaves the South Vietnamese Army under-funded and results in a decline of military readiness and morale. To imply the South couldn`t cut it alone is false.




While he didn't agree with the Case-Church Amendment and in '75 actually asked Ford to try to overturn it, at the same time, in his memoirs, he had THIS to say: "The Paris Accord had been signed and the President, well aware of the political liabilities of our continuing presence in Vietnam, began cycling troops home. This good faith effort, he felt would advance his cause of detente with the Soviet Union, as well as accerate the process of rapproachment with China. When the Congress of the United States passed the Case-Church Amendment, it was of little importance until early '75 when the NV violated the PA as it seemed they had little to fear from us."
We can all play "what if" until the cows come home, but at some point you have to recognize a lost cause for exactly what it is. Westmoreland did, Nixon did, and Congress did.


Westmoralnd knew victory was attianable, he was a pragmatist and certainly no fucking cut and runner:


"We saved SA south of IndoChina, and we might have saved South Vietnam (SV), if we could have been supported and sustained."

Ok. So it was leftists and those who are lead by public opinion. The ones who normally pay scant attention to detail, the "moderates" or of no party affiliation.


I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but this sort of sounds like "if you're not a conservative, you're a sheep". If you look at the state-by-state breakdown in '72, there were a number of conservatives that became the swing vote to bounce their own conservative representation OUT of Congress.

Westmorland, speaking of the radical left:

"Unfortunately, the staying power of the American public had limits when it came to Vietnam. The anti-war movement was an important factor undermining public support."

Not to put words in Westies mouth, not to take them away either and leave false impressions.