I am the one you have been waiting for

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by BeyGon

Ike told Kennedy not to get involved.

1 - 2 - 3 - what are we fighting for
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn
Next stop is Vietnam.

Corrected that for you....

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Dictators are never the answer. You are such an elitist that it actually turns the stomach.

You need to get out more.

Democracy is not always the answer. What happens in a country where the populations is simply too ignorant about politics to make an informed choice? Do you remember the Philippines in the 1980's when Corazon Aquino was elected because everyone that voted for her got a yellow T-shirt? Is that a meaningful democracy?

Or what about a place like Iraq or (the former) Yugoslavia, where there are such violent ethnic/tribal and religious tensions, that any merely democratic system would elected the majority tribe/group and ensure the minorities are wiped out?

And what about the many countries in the third world whose institutions are so corrupt that a fair and democratic election is not possible and the result rigged and meaningless?

And what happens when you have a combination of the three scenarios above?

You need to be a giggling virgin to seriously believe a meaningful democracy is possible and desirable in every country on this planet today. It is not. It is a laudable goal no doubt; but it is absolute friggin pie-in-the-sky in many places.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by BeyGon

You have your times/dates a little mixed up.
The last American troops left Vietnam March 29, 1973, Nixon was still President.
Ford had nothing to do with it.

All the better. Because I'm truly a fan of Nixon in this regard. I feel the liberal media has done him a disservice by concentrating on Watergate in lieu of the fact he was one of the main architects of our exit from Vietnam.

[BeyGon]

Originally Posted by dd74

All the better. Because I'm truly a fan of Nixon in this regard. I feel the liberal media has done him a disservice by concentrating on Watergate in lieu of the fact he was one of the main architects of our exit from Vietnam.

Some people try to call it Nixon's war, they forget about Johnson,-ah will neva escalate the wa in Vitnam- and McNamara
Nixon started pulling troops out his first year in office.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by Dottore

You need to get out more.

Democracy is not always the answer. What happens in a country where the populations is simply too ignorant about politics to make an informed choice? Do you remember the Philippines in the 1980's when Corazon Aquino was elected because everyone that voted for her got a yellow T-shirt? Is that a meaningful democracy?

Or what about a place like Iraq or (the former) Yugoslavia, where there are such violent ethnic/tribal and religious tensions, that any merely democratic system would elected the majority tribe/group and ensure the minorities are wiped out?

And what about the many countries in the third world whose institutions are so corrupt that a fair and democratic election is not possible and the result rigged and meaningless?

And what happens when you have a combination of the three scenarios above?

You need to be a giggling virgin to seriously believe a meaningful democracy is possible and desirable in every country on this planet today. It is not. It is a laudable goal no doubt; but it is absolute friggin pie-in-the-sky in many places.

But communism works everywhere right?

[nota]

Originally Posted by BeyGon

back to the opening question
how could any leader do a worse job then our current fool in chief has
__________________
QUESTION!!!

If we had elected those other guys we would have found out.

yes would have been so sad if we didnot have a falling dollar and sky high oil
along with a war in iraq that is totally with out reason
and maybe limit the war on terror to places that had terrorists
there by actually capture their leader
and a budget that was not only balanced but in the black lowering the nation debts
how did we ever get thru the horror of the 90's

[island911]

Originally Posted by nota

along with a war in iraq that is totally with out reason
and maybe limit the war on terror to places that had terrorists
...

So you think that Iraq has been void of terrorists, eh?

[Racerbvd]

Liberals don't think, that is the problem

[nota]

Originally Posted by island911

So you think that Iraq has been void of terrorists, eh?

before invasion yes it was
esp the al-kiddies who were hated by God-damm Insane himself

now once we got in there and made a bunch of new ones out of the local nuts
others did flock in to fight too
but mostly, there were damm few real terrorists there before

[Tobra]

Obamunists, oh man, the muleaid is strong tonight! I have to apologize for poking the troll with a stick.

Originally Posted by nynor

i totally agree that the vietnam war was lost by our media. completely. i do, however, disagree that we had it won. the chinese were sending men and materials, nearly an endless supply, to support vietnam.

yet it was the Vietnamese who whipped our butts...

Originally Posted by nynor

whoops, i guess the giap argument goes down in flames.

but back to the original post, does anyone REALLY believe that barack is the ACTUAL antichrist?

you are trolltastic

I have no doubt there is someone, somewhere, who would argue that Mr Obama is the spawn of Satan. He is dark, and he is a prince; or was until that euro campaign tour.

Dumbass could have put a digital camera in his shirt pocket, done the stupid hold the camera out and take a picture of the both of you, mail the signed 8 by 10 with a canned ham or a nice big cheese because maybe everybody is not a goy. He did not have to take his press people with him, all he had to do is keep his mouth shut and smile. I thought he was smart. What did those people in Cambridge do to him?

Originally Posted by BeyGon

back to the opening question
how could any leader do a worse job then our current fool in chief has
__________________
QUESTION!!!

If we had elected those other guys we would have found out.

you will see in about 6 months. I am dubious about Mr McCain winning, and things will be very bad if he does not.

Mr Nixon was a great President, his problem is that he was not a good man.

[BeyGon]

Mr Nixon was a great President, his problem is that he was not a good man.

but he DID believe in America

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

Liberals don't think, that is the problem

Is that seriously and ad paid for by the McCain campaign? I mean if it is McCain is even dumber than I thought.

[BeyGon]

Originally Posted by BeyGon

Yes, I AM THE ONE.

I don't care who paid for or okd that video, it is pretty funny and I think right on.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by BeyGon

I don't care who paid for or okd that video, it is pretty funny and I think right on.

Really? Nothing like the voters coming to grips with the real issues, eh?

Sad, that this is the level to which politicking is reduced in your fine land.

[island911]

Originally Posted by Dottore

Really? Nothing like the voters coming to grips with the real issues, eh?

Sad, that this is the level to which politicking is reduced in your fine land.

LOL. Just what issues has Obama come to grips with? "We are the ones we've been waiting for"(?) or maybe; " A light will shine down . . and you will say to yourself "I have to vote for Barrack""(?)

The man is ALL SHOW / no go. (what has he done for anyone ...other than himself?)

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by nostatic

I'm glad you at least admit that the reason for war had nothing to do with caring about the fate of the Vietnamese people.

What do you mean "admit"? It is a fact. And i am not culpable in any case, why should i deny the truth?

Vietnam was a proxy. A mere pawn...to both sides. The Soviets and Chinese didn't care about Vietnam's people either. Not one whit.

Originally Posted by nostatic

But I thought we were fighting the Chinese and the spread of *those* godless commies, not the Soviets in this case.

We were fighting the Soviets, the Chinese, and Communism in general. The Vietnam war had nothing at all to do with Vietnam other than that being the place that some of the world's most powerful leaders stuck a pin in a map and said "We will fight the enemy there." On both sides.

What's so hard to understand about that?

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by Dottore

Democracy is not always the answer. What happens in a country where the populations is simply too ignorant about politics to make an informed choice?

Elitist. (spit)

Originally Posted by Dottore

But this is my point. Diem was a US puppet. When his corruption (and intransigence on policy and tactical matters) became too much for the US, he became an embarrassment, and the US supported the generals in their coup against Diem. This is settled history. Well documented.

That is what you do with inconvenient puppets. You cut the strings.

So why are you complaining about it?

In your racist-elitist view the unwashed brown masses weren't fit to govern themselves with democracy, therefore they needed to be 'helped along' by a dictator anyway.

I guess you prefer Uncle Ho to Diem.

Methinx Uncle Ho killed many, many times more people than Diem did.

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by nota

before invasion yes it was
esp the al-kiddies who were hated by God-damm Insane himself

Where do you come up with that? The CIA has reports from the 1990s that suggest connections between Saddam and al-Qaeda.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by nota

NO BUT Bui Tin, Colonel NVA General Staff is not General GIAP
nore is there any BS about they were ready to quit if the bombing had been keap up
a few days longer

General GIAP was willing to take any loss and keep fighting one day longer
then the other side

so unless we were willing to still be there fighting TODAY how do you win a war against people with that mind set?????

For the US to win a total war is just a matter of willpower and effective leadership. The military power is in place, and has been for decades.

For instance, Al Q and the alphabet soup of Islamist extremist groups are our mortal enemies and have pledged to fight us in Iraq "until the end."

How's that going for them?

Had Bush resigned in 2004 (As LBJ did) and his successor pulled us out of Iraq by early 2006 (As Nixon did), Iraq would be a total disaster right now, and the US war effort a total defeat. History would have repeated itself.

What was the difference this time? The president didn't meddle with the Military, and he didn't QUIT in the middle of a war like Johnson did.

Originally Posted by nota

back to the opening question
how could any leader do a worse job then our current fool in chief has

LBJ would've done a WHOLE lot worse. He'd be personally approving/rejecting bombing missions and target lists as he did during the Vietnam War.

At least Bush lets the military run the show. Now that "the military" is not Donald Rumsfeld anymore, things have largely righted themselves and we should have the lions share of our guys out of Iraq and into Afdirtistan by 2010. And we will leave behind a functional representative gov't (the proper term for a 'democracy') in Iraq with a strong and highly experienced military in place.

As opposed to Saddam Hussien, who was a freakin maniac nutcase who liked to agitate us constantly. Invade his neighbors. Lob missiles at the Jews. Attack his own countrymen with nerve gas. Stuff like that.

And Afghanistan is no longer a sanctuary for terrorist groups.

And no attacks on US Soil since 9-11.

Seems to me that foreign policy wise the ONLY thing Bush hasn't done is catch OBL.

His domestic policies and judgement wrt apointees have been terrible though. Just terrible. I am no Bush fan, but he is 100000000000000000000x the war leader than LBJ ever was.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Elitist. (spit)

Elitist?

Maybe you can explain to me the value of a vote that is cast without any understanding of why you are casting it or who you are casting it for.

Does the mere act of casting that ballot have some inherent value to you?

That, sadly, is the case in many places in the world with largely rural, uneducated populations.

It is what it is.