That's why we will not go after N Korea. We only stab old allies in the back.

 

Well in Panama we were going in to rescue a POW and woops! We got their head of state. How that happened I have no idea.

Ho Chi Min was on CIA payroll. It's indirect but I think it counts.

 

Bay of Pigs counts too.....well kinda....we promise troops, weapons and support when it all comes down we will be there for you.



Fighting starts and we sit a mile off shore and watch as the rebels get slaughtered like "pigs"

 

When is the government going to catch on that we pick all the wrong people to give weapons to?

 

Actually I have no opinion on this topic or anyone participating, I just have wanted to use that picture for soooo long, thx for the opportunity VRGNCD5

 

I don't know about the CIA. What I did learn was that Ho had been making overtures to the US ever since the end of WWI. During WWII he even lent unofficial help to the Flying Tigers and other American forces operating in the area. Apparently he had a gentleman's agreement with some US General who failed to keep his end of the bargain after the war.

After WWII the imperialist Allies were supposed to give up their overseas posessions. England gave up the middle east, including what is now Iraq. The US could rightly have sponsored the formation of an independant Vietnam. Ho sought help from the Soviets, who listened to him after the US did not, and began to liberate Vietnam.

All the US had needed to do was to keep its promises and use a little diplomacy. But instead, the GOP leadership decided that their technology would make quick work of Ho. The rest is history.

 

so why do you have that scarf tied around your neck?

 

"Imperialist" allies? Where are you going with this statement? Now are you stating that the US had no business with WWII? That appears to be the "tone" you have taken.

Umm...which GOP leadership would this be? Minh was first "betrayed" by Truman who was a Democrat. So were Kennedy and Johnson, when the Vietnam war escalated to a point of no return for the US. Can't blame it on congress, as I believe there was no GOP majority during that time.

Your liberal view (slant) on things is really showing. Hey, how was the protest in Chicago? Burn any flags?

David Liske

 

Typing has no "tone", so you'd be better off not reading your own prejudices into what I say. If you don't know what imperialism or colonies are, I suggest that you attend middle school. There's no need for you to comment on subjects that you don't understand.


Why Eisenhower's, of course.


My previous post shows the earlier rebuffs.

US involvement in Indochina was superflous under Kennedy. Yes Johnson was a hawk, so what? Do you think somehow that little fact wipes out all of the bad things that GOP party members have done?


From your name-calling I can deduce that you're unhappy with the truth. But it's still true; you obviously can't argue with that.

 

I know exactly what imperialism and colonization are...no need to explain. Yet, imperialism tends to have a negative connotation, and colonization does not. That is why I raised the question.

Again, Minh was FIRST betrayed by Truman. That set the stage. You can't change that fact. Simply because Eisenhower followed, you want to blame the GOP? The flaw in that logic is that I could counter that since Kennedy and Johnson followed, the Democrats should be blamed.

Name calling??? Give me a break. Saying you have a liberal slant is name calling? Wondering if and how you protested is name calling? Sheesh. If I called you a f*****g d**k, that, I agree would be name calling. But, quite frankly, I haven't stooped to your level.

David Liske