NationStates Jolt Archive

During his campaign for presidency, Richard Nixon promised chronic war in Vietnam.

To his infinite credit, he broke his insane campaign promise and ended the Vietnam War. Even better, he reached out in conciliation to Red China and the USSR. (Of course, before he ended the war, he also bombed the shit out of innocent people in Cambodia and North Vietnam, so it wasn't a totally perfect outcome by any means)

But ultimately, Nixon's foreign policy toward the reds showed that peace, conciliation, and trade achieve lasting results. Today Vietnam is a friend and trade partner of the US, and even Navy ace John McCain is popular in Vietnam. Water under the bridge.

Additionally, by ending the war Nixon helped remove a significant obstacle on America's road to recovery from its economic quagmires of the 60s and 70s.

****

During his campaign for presidency, Barack Obama promised chronic war in Afghanistan.

Will Obama take inspiration from Nixon's example, and break his insane campaign promise and wisely end the Afghanistan War? Or will Obama follow through with his campaign promises and squander more American lives and treasure in Afghanistan and kill more innocent Afghan civilians?

Peace, trade, and reconciliation healed the rift between the US and Red Vietnam, and helped lift millions of Vietnamese out of poverty. Peace, trade, and reconciliation will heal the rift between the US and the Taliban. A hopeful sign is Obama's skepticism against the so called "War on Drugs." This bodes well for Afghanistan's poppy-based economy, which can provide the capital base for additional economic development.

Here's to hoping our new President Barack Obama ends the insane war in Afghanistan, ends the war in Iraq, and closes down all our military bases in Saudi Arabia, Germany, Korea, Okinawa, and elsewhere. (If Bush had done exactly that on 9/12/2001, if Bush immediately capitulated to Bin Laden's reasonable demand that US withdraw from Saudi Arabia, the "War on Terrorism" would have stopped with ~2,000 unfortunate American casualties but no more unnecessary deaths. Instead thousands more on both sides are now dead, and untold billions of dollars squandered)

Obama will do well to learn from Nixon and extend a peaceful hand of friendship to our supposed "worst enemies", and moderate them with trade and reconciliation.

This should be interesting.

I always liked Nixon and still think he is one of the best presidents despite Watergate, although Afghanistan and Vietnam are two entirely different situations in my opinion.
If Bush had done exactly that on 9/12/2001, if Bush immediately capitulated to Bin Laden's reasonable demand that US withdraw from Saudi Arabia
That would lead down a very dangerous road

That would lead down a very dangerous road

The pro-war people back in the 70s said the exact same thing. They claimed capitulation in Vietnam will lead to a "domino effect".

Absolutely not. Peace, trade, and reconciliation with the US improves the native peoples' living conditions and will moderate tyrannical regimes like the Taliban, just as it moderated the tyrannical regime in Red Vietnam.

Wouldn't Obama have to bomb Cambodia first? I'm not saying that would be a bad idea; I just want to be sure we're on the same page here.

Wouldn't Obama have to bomb Cambodia first? I'm not saying that would be a bad idea; I just want to be sure we're on the same page here.

Yes, as I alluded to in the OP technically he would have to first firebomb Cambodia.

During the vietnam war, the US and Vietnam had no relations.

Right now, the US and Afghanistan not only have relations, but GOOD relations.

If anything, withdrawing from Afghanistan will make things worse, as they'll have to put up with more taliban attacks (and the rare possibility that the taliban -- or extremists -- will gain control of the country).

During the vietnam war, the US and Vietnam had no relations.
Incorrect, during the war US had very good relations with the Republic of Vietnam, the unstable country based from Saigon that sucked American blood, money, and lives.

The US should cut support from the unstable Islamic Republic of Afghanistan in Kabul just as the US cut support from Saigon.

Yes, as I alluded to in the OP technically he would have to first firebomb Cambodia.
Alrighty then. Is that Obama website for people to propose policies still open? Because I've got a great one:
"Dear Mr. Obama,

I think it would help very much in Afghanistan if you were to bomb the shit out of Cambodia, kthxbai."

Alrighty then. Is that Obama website for people to propose policies still open? Because I've got a great one:
"Dear Mr. Obama,

I think it would help very much in Afghanistan if you were to bomb the shit out of Cambodia, kthxbai."
Excellent work, you are truly helping make a difference.

Incorrect, during the war US had very good relations with the Republic of Vietnam, the unstable country based from Saigon that sucked American blood, money, and lives.

The US should cut support for the unstable Islamic Republic of Afghanistan in Kabul just as the US cut support from Saigon.

I stand corrected (although in hindsight, I should have paid more attention).

But the thing is: in Vietnam, the US's opponent was wining. In Afghanistan, the US's opponent lost. QUICKLY.

Um. Didn't Nixon actually campaign in 1968 on promises he would end the war in Vietnam and end the draft? .... there goes your premise ....

Regardless, the other premises of your argument are so bizarre there isn't really anything worth discussion here.

Ummm first off Nixon ran on a campaign of "peace with honor" in Vietnam.
Once he got in office he started the policy of Vietnamization where he slowly shifted responsibilities of defense to south Vietnamese with the occasional mass bombing of things he thought was ebil.

Ummm first off Nixon ran on a campaign of "peace with honor" in Vietnam.
Once he got in office he started the policy of Vietnamese-ification where he slowly shifted responsibilities of defense to south Vietnamese with the occasional mass bombing of things he thought was ebil.

Vietnamization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamization#Vietnamization.2C_1969.E2.80.931975) not Vietnamese-ification

Um. Didn't Nixon actually campaign in 1968 on promises he would end the war in Vietnam and end the draft? .... there goes your premise ....

This ^.


You know, we had Afgahnistan pretty much secure until Bush sent all the troops to Iraq.

Vietnamization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamization#Vietnamization.2C_1969.E2.80.931975) not Vietnamese-ification

thank you i was looking for that spelling on google for like 10 minutes and gave up when i couldn't find it, and just tried to fudge it.

You mean he should have lost a lot of elections, looked like a nervous rat on TV, and then become the next "Comeback King" of America? o_0;;;
Why would he want to emulate that?

Only if Obama's head gets to appear in future Futurama movies.

You mean he should have lost a lot of elections, looked like a nervous rat on TV, and then become the next "Comeback King" of America? o_0;;;
Why would he want to emulate that?

Nixon only lost the 1960 election because of cheating.

thank you i was looking for that spelling on google for like 10 minutes and gave up when i couldn't find it, and just tried to fudge it.

no problem ;)

Nixon only lost the 1960 election because of cheating.Yeah, I figured out I was talking about the wrong guy by the time I posted.

Nixon lost the 1960 pres. election, and the 1960-something California governor election. (Those are the two that I know of.)

Nixon only lost the 1960 election because of cheating.

LOL

That statement would be sad if it weren't so laughable.

Yeah, I figured out I was talking about the wrong guy by the time I posted.

Nixon lost the 1960 pres. election, and the 1960-something California governor election.

he only lost 1960 because the dead came back to life and voted for Kennedy in Chicago, and in Texas some 6,000 plus people all lined up in alphabetical order and voted at the last minute for Kennedy.

Soooo... We bomb Pakistan(Cambodia I'm hoping?), skip out of Afghanistan... And then what? You know, I did two tours there. I hope that wasn't a waste. Maybe India will pick up the pieces?

Ummm first off Nixon ran on a campaign of "peace with honor" in Vietnam.
Once he got in office he started the policy of Vietnamization where he slowly shifted responsibilities of defense to south Vietnamese with the occasional mass bombing of things he thought was ebil.
I stand corrected.

Soooo... We bomb Pakistan(Cambodia I'm hoping?)

I don't think it really matters what you substitute for [Cambodia]. What about [Chad]? I've never liked them.

Nixon only lost the 1960 election because of cheating.

No, Nixon was the cheater. That's how he won in 1972.

No, Nixon was the cheater. That's how he won in 1972.

No Nixon one 72' because he got the troops out of Vietnam and his opponent was for legalizing marijuana. Nixon could have ran on a program of eating your kid's brains and still won by a land slide.

No. The North Vietnamese were sane, and were, in fact, a better government than the POS we were supporting in South Vietnam. In fact, the major problem of the Vietnam war was that we were supporting the wrong side.

The Taliban are not sane, not viable, and make their opponents look good. This time around, we got the sides right. Once we're out of Iraq, we can support the government of Afghanistan relatively cheaply and with a clear conscience.

No. The North Vietnamese were sane, and were, in fact, a better government than the POS we were supporting in South Vietnam. In fact, the major problem of the Vietnam war was that we were supporting the wrong side.

The Taliban are not sane, not viable, and make their opponents look good. This time around, we got the sides right. Once we're out of Iraq, we can support the government of Afghanistan relatively cheaply and with a clear conscience.

If we had supported Ho Chi Minh when he was seeking independence(or even autonomy) after WW2, there would have been no communism. Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist Communism was just a nice cover story to get guns and money from the Soviets and Chinese when the US would not give diplomatic support to the self determination we constantly stated.

What I would like to see in Afghanistan is a legal and supervised opium production. There is a large predicted short fall in opiates for medicine this year and Afghanistan could fill the gap and likely make a lot of money while doing it.

If we had supported Ho Chi Minh when he was seeking independence(or even autonomy) after WW2, there would have been no communism. Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist Communism was just a nice cover story to get guns and money from the Soviets and Chinese when the US would not give diplomatic support to the self determination we constantly stated.

What I would like to see in Afghanistan is a legal and supervised opium production. There is a large predicted short fall in opiates for medicine this year and Afghanistan could fill the gap and likely make a lot of money while doing it.

You're right in all particulars. That's a great plan.

You mean you want the President to resign?

I am not a crook.

Obama will do well to learn from Nixon and extend a peaceful hand of friendship to our supposed "worst enemies", and moderate them with trade and reconciliation.
And here I was, thinking that you meant he should resign just like Nixon.

Apparently, I'm not the first to have that thought...

Maybe he can just wave his hands around with the "V" for victory...

Nixon only lost the 1960 election because of cheating.

If Kennedy was clever enough to fake 46,000 votes in Texas, then he clearly deserved to be President.:p

of course everyone should end every war that they can and avoid starting or provoking any new ones. in order to do that though, one needs to recognize the most recognized authority locally in each place. in afghanistan for example, that would NOT be the puppet government set up in cabul, but something, and i'm still not sure i've got the name of it right, called the jurga, which is a kind of united nations of local tribal leaders, that's held at certain times of year. the time or times of year, having something to do with migration and living patterns traditional in the area.

And here I was, thinking that you meant he should resign just like Nixon.

Apparently, I'm not the first to have that thought...

Maybe he can just wave his hands around with the "V" for victory...

So you want Biden to be President? :p

http://www.medaloffreedom.com/RichardNixonFarewell.jpg
I am not a crook

During his campaign for presidency, Richard Nixon promised chronic war in Vietnam.

To his infinite credit, he broke his insane campaign promise and ended the Vietnam War. Even better, he reached out in conciliation to Red China and the USSR. (Of course, before he ended the war, he also bombed the shit out of innocent people in Cambodia and North Vietnam, so it wasn't a totally perfect outcome by any means)

But ultimately, Nixon's foreign policy toward the reds showed that peace, conciliation, and trade achieve lasting results. Today Vietnam is a friend and trade partner of the US, and even Navy ace John McCain is popular in Vietnam. Water under the bridge.

Additionally, by ending the war Nixon helped remove a significant obstacle on America's road to recovery from its economic quagmires of the 60s and 70s.

****

I can't verify the accuracy of all of the above, though some of it is certainly right. And I give full credit to Nixon for whatever good he managed to achieve; in diplomacy, economics, or anything else. However...

During his campaign for presidency, Barack Obama promised chronic war in Afghanistan.

I disagree. To my knowledge, he promised to focus on the actual War on Terror instead of Iraq. I presume by that he meant that we would actually try to win it. Winning a war is not the same as chronic warfare, and not every war the evil Americans fight is the next Vietnam.:rolleyes:

I am once again reminded of the need for a wanker smiley on this forum.

Will Obama take inspiration from Nixon's example, and break his insane campaign promise and wisely end the Afghanistan War? Or will Obama follow through with his campaign promises and squander more American lives and treasure in Afghanistan and kill more innocent Afghan civilians?

Right, the whole point of the war in Afghanistan is too waste money and kill innocent people.:rolleyes:

And frankly, I see nothing insane about working to permanently remove a regime as corrupt and evil as the Taliban, responding to a direct attack, or working to actually finish the job now that we're already entangled.

Leaving when their is no other viable alternative is one thing. But leaving because its too difficult, or because you didn't like the war to begin with, and ignoring our responsibility now that we're entangled in the situation, sounds like the easy, feel good way out.

Peace, trade, and reconciliation healed the rift between the US and Red Vietnam, and helped lift millions of Vietnamese out of poverty. Peace, trade, and reconciliation will heal the rift between the US and the Taliban. A hopeful sign is Obama's skepticism against the so called "War on Drugs." This bodes well for Afghanistan's poppy-based economy, which can provide the capital base for additional economic development.

Right, because the future of Afghanistan is best tied to a dependence on the drug trade.:rolleyes:

And to be honest, while I appreciate that war may often not be the best solution, and that diplomacy with corrupt nations is nessissary, I would question the ethics of getting too friendly with large-scale human rights abusers.

Here's to hoping our new President Barack Obama ends the insane war in Afghanistan, ends the war in Iraq, and closes down all our military bases in Saudi Arabia, Germany, Korea, Okinawa, and elsewhere. (If Bush had done exactly that on 9/12/2001, if Bush immediately capitulated to Bin Laden's reasonable demand that US withdraw from Saudi Arabia, the "War on Terrorism" would have stopped with ~2,000 unfortunate American casualties but no more unnecessary deaths. Instead thousands more on both sides are now dead, and untold billions of dollars squandered)

You really think a full withdrawl from Saudi Arabia would have prevented future attacks?

Also, while I agree that the US would be better off out of Saudi Arabia, you should not forget that Bin Laden would still be an asshole who should be brought to justice. Ultimately, even if it would end with the US getting out and leaving it at that, it would still be wrong. Because provoked or unprovoked, murder is murder. And Osama bin Laden is a murderer, a supporter of human rights abuses, and a war criminal. Theirfor, he should be brought to justice, regardless of whatever misdeeds others are guilty of.

Unless you feel that the deliberate mass murder of US civilians is somehow justified by the pressense of US bases in Saudi Arabia? In which case, don't expect my next post to be so civil.

Obama will do well to learn from Nixon and extend a peaceful hand of friendship to our supposed "worst enemies", and moderate them with trade and reconciliation.

He should extend a hand to those who are willing to reach out and take it. He should attempt diplomacy and use force only as a last resort in a just cause. If he does go to war, he should be honest about the reasons and work to build international support. However, he should not just role over for terrorists.

Also, I'm not sure why you're making these arguments, but I'll make a guess. You're yet another simplistic fool who thinks that all the world's problems are caused by the evil imperialist Americans oppressing the brown people, and that every guerilla conflict in a third world country is automatically the next Vietnam. If I'm wrong in that guess, I apologise. But I do not believe it is entirely unfounded given your rhetoric.

If Kennedy was clever enough to fake 46,000 votes in Texas, then he clearly deserved to be President.:p

that's what LBJ said and after Kennedy was shot the man who faked the votes in Texas got to be president.

So you want Biden to be President? :p
Well, if it were really going to be like Nixon, Biden would resign over a scandal in his home state, Obama would appoint a nice guy that's a few cards short of a full deck to be VP, then Obama would resign and be pardoned. I'm just hoping we don't get Jimmy Carter again.

its true, nixxon did a couple of good things inspite of himself. ping-pong diplomacy and the vietnam pullout. i'm not sure how much his intentions deserve credit for either, but they DID happen on his watch. something anyway.

anything comparable during bush's decade of world terror, i'm sure there HAS to be SOMEthing, but i'm still drawing a blank.

well maybe if the economic colapse turns out to have some kind of silver lining, which it always might, maybe the colapse of international corporate hedgemony, if that should happen to resault, maybe human population will emplode as a resault of famine and disease resaulting from global climate change, not something that will be reguarded highly by the generation that experiences it, though maybe by those who come after.

the problem is, has always been really, that the resaults of policies created under one president's watch, usually don't show up until several adminstrations later, resaulting in them getting credit/blame actual belonging to those who came before.

i think this mess in the middle east and the economic problems, probably started with policies under raygun. i know it was under ragun that rumsfield financially underwrote the tallibon, under the guise of some sort of international agricultural subsidy. i don't have the details memorized, but the info is out there and a matter of public record.

well a lot of places in 'latin america', i.e. the sothern continent of the western hemisphere and the isthmus connecting it to the northern one, seem to have shed their extreme right wing tyrannies, and replaced them with some kind of mishmosh between their rightful traditional indiginous cultures and some sort of quasi socialism. i know not everyone sees this as a positive thing, but i've yet to be convinced of it being in any way a negative one.

now i don't see how bush in any way deserves credit for that, although maybe his focus on the middle east, taking his eyes off our neighbors to the south, may have contributed to making it possible.

and then of course there's digital tv. another sour absurd right wing joke.
(anybody remember when they said the changeover was going to be FREE to get people to go along with it?)