James DiEugenio Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 Galbraith's trip and report is also mentioned in The Best and The Brightest, p. 152. Halberstam places it in November of 1961. Mansfield's trip is fully one year later, at the end of 1962. (Newman, p. 321) As I said, two very different time frames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) From Tom Scully over at DPF: https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0820333697 John Clark Pratt - 2008 - Preview - More editionsPerspectives on the War Years, 1941-1975 John Clark Pratt ... In November President Kennedy receives this hurried message from the ambassador to India, John Kenneth Galbraith, who has ... I HAVE JUST COMPLETED THREE INTENSIVE DAYS IN SAIGON WHICH, WITH CINCPAC [COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, PACIFIC] ... Edited March 6, 2016 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Senator Mansfield was an early supporter of Ngo Dinh Diem, Mansfield had a change of heart on the Vietnam issue after a visit to Vietnam in 1962. He reported to President Kennedy on December 2, 1962, that US money given to Diem's government was being squandered and that the US should avoid further involvement in Vietnam. It was this report that led to months of talks that began within Kennedy's administration to move the Diem brothers out of Vietnam, eleven months later a coup would take place both in Vietnam and Dallas. ASSASSINS P.170 A Man Without A Country ~Scott Kaiser Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Several books contradict themselves about Galbraith in the Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War that Tom Scully also posted talks about Galbraith and how he opposed the war in Vietnam, however, in his son's book, he says his father and McNamara agreed with how the war was going and McNamara wanted to see it escalate. In this book, it talks about how Galbraith wrote Kennedy a letter posing his views, however, it also goes on to say that "Galbraith" who was ALREADY in Washington was to fly back to India via Saigon, now does that really make any sense if Galbraith was to fly back to Washington, (your words not mine) and report to Kennedy? Can you see? If you were to read every book Tom put up they EACH contradict themselves, and I'm not sure Tom even realized that. I believe he was in just too much of a hurry to prove me wrong, which I don't blame him. I'm sure there were multiple researchers looking for the answers, but when it comes down to it, by the time it was all said and done. The bottom line is this, it was Mansfield's report that ultimately had Kennedy realize the seriousness in Vietnam which made him consider the withdraw. It was because of Galbraith and his later speaking up against the war sending "letters" to Kennedy that had Kennedy send Mansfield to Vietnam. The End! https://books.google.com/books?id=qh5lffww-KsC&pg=PA405&lpg=PA405&dq=galbraith+returned+to+india+saigon&source=bl&ots=jCFZC3xpRv&sig=CGQu0VLTgqWcW66LZjodGgheT28&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTmqP-varLAhXGNT4KHa28AgIQ6AEIHzAB#v=onepage&q=galbraith%20returned%20to%20india%20saigon&f=false Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Scott; Galbraith himself is writing that cable and sending it to Kennedy, after he spent three days with CINPAC in Saigon. That's it partner. I don't know why you went off on this in the first place. Since that whole thing is pretty much common knowledge. Edited March 6, 2016 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 Scott, Don't talk about silly wagers. If you have something which proves Greg wrong then provide it so everyone can read it and make up their own minds. If Greg is making an unsupported claim, ask him to provide the evidence to support the claim. Once again, readers can make up their own minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Scott, Don't talk about silly wagers. If you have something which proves Greg wrong then provide it so everyone can read it and make up their own minds. If Greg is making an unsupported claim, ask him to provide the evidence to support the claim. Once again, readers can make up their own minds. I've already done this. The "original" story about Galbraith going to Vietnam in 1961 came from James K. Galbraith himself. At that time Kennedy was already dealing with the Bay of Pigs. He, (Kennedy) DID NOT INVOLVE himself as much in the Vietnam war as he did with Cuba in 1961. It was during this year of 1961 the administration was also sending "millions" of dollars to president Diem, had Kennedy sent Galbraith to Vietnam why then is there no mentioned of that in the minutes? Secondly, if Galbraith [had] gone to Vietnam, why then did he not report what Mansfield obviously saw what president Diem was doing with the money the United States was giving them? Just because of a few books that contradict themselves, don't know whether Galbraith is coming or going never left India. He did "observe" the war from afar, and wrote Kennedy how he felt about the war, that's it, that's as far as it went. History has this all wrong, after Kennedy received Galbraith's "letter" it was still a few months before Kennedy sent Mansfield to Vietnam to find out what's going on, surely, the president wouldn't need a second opinion about money being squandered in Vietnam would he? In closing, if you Mr. Burton read my number #48 post to Mrs. Beckett you would have [understood what I said to her, which should have helped in making up your mind,] with that I said, I did say, "it wouldn't happen again", your follow up posts only tells me that one, you read my post but didn't understand it, or two, you read my post, understood it, but, couldn't make up your mind. Which is it Mr. Burton? Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) In-fact, most of Kennedy's speech's in 1961 deal with Cuba, not the Vietnam war. The only thing that matters here, in the end is whether nor not I know the truth. I really shouldn't care what others believe, everyone will form their own opinion, however, history has this wrong, and that's all I'm going to say. Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) To fully understand the Vietnam war, you must include President Truman and Eisenhower. Now, both Truman and Eisenhower believed the only way we would win this war was to escalate the war, McNamara also believed the same, as of December 1961, 15,000 "advisers" in Kennedy's administration was killed, Galbraith had not gone to Vietnam in no time in 1961 or at anytime in December of 1961. Most of Kennedy's speeches about Vietnam have been in September of 1962-63, and beyond. Kennedy sent Mansfield towards the end of November 1962 which he then reported to Kennedy on December 2, 1962. It was in Senator Mansfield's report that persuaded president Kennedy to begin his withdrawal of troops. But, Kennedy's outlook was not to fully withdraw from Vietnam meaning we would provide arms, money, advisers and training. However, after Mansfield reported that President Diem was "squandering" the money we were giving them is when Kennedy decided to start pulling our "troops" out, just take a look at the roaster as when when they started coming back Here is an interview of Kennedy on September 2, 1963 just nine months out from Mansfield's report to the president. http://www.shmoop.com/vietnam-war/statistics.html Does it matter? Nixon, with the swoop of a pen ended the war, but because of Watergate he was unable to see it though, and president Ford did that for him while granting ex president Nixon a pardon because Ford believed Nixon really had no involvement in Watergate. Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 SK: In-fact, most of Kennedy's speech's in 1961 deal with Cuba, not the Vietnam war. About the first 150 pages of Newman's book, JFK and Vietnam, concerns the year 1961. Evidently, he thought there was a lot happening then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Following Mansfield's trip to Vietnam at the request of President Kennedy, Senate Majority Leader Mansfield "became the first U.S. official to refuse to make an optimistic public comment on the progress of the war." Basically, what Kennedy is asking is that Mansfield not say ANYTHING about going to Vietnam and or reporting back to the president, or his opinion about the progress of the war, thus the story of Galbraith visiting Vietnam is later created. I'm willing to bet that most folks here including Jim had no earthly idea that Mansfield who was originally a supporter of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem, but, Mansfield would change his opinion due to the situation in Vietnam after his visit. He claimed that the $2 billion of the United States had poured into Vietnam during the previous seven years and had accomplished nothing. He placed blame squarely on the Diem regime for its failure to share power and win support from the South Vietnamese people. He suggested that Americans, despite being motivated by a sincere desire to stop the spread of communism, had simply taken the place formerly occupied by the French colonial power in the minds of many Vietnamese. Mansfield’s change of opinion surprised and irritated President Kennedy. During a September 2, 1962 meeting with the press Kennedy believed that a full withdraw would be wrong, meaning in way of support, but without "troops" due to the report by Mansfield a scale back of troops were to start to happen, and Kennedy signed the bill. He would later be assassinated in Dallas, but not over Vietnam, although, LBJ reversed Kennedy's decision. The United States would refuse to contend a defeat in a county no bigger then California. The brass believed there was a way of winning by an escalation of air raids, Robert Kennedy knew that by 1965 we needed to pull out, and while at that time of having more then 500,000 troops in Vietnam, by 1965-66 it scaled down to a little over 300,000. Galbraith did write a letter or two, I'm not contending or disputing that, however, Kennedy did not, and I repeat myself for the sake of history. The President did NOT send Galbraith to Vietnam for any report. Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 I said in post #57 "I'm willing to bet" I didn't say money though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 Scott, Don't talk about silly wagers. If you have something which proves Greg wrong then provide it so everyone can read it and make up their own minds. If Greg is making an unsupported claim, ask him to provide the evidence to support the claim. Once again, readers can make up their own minds. I've already done this. The "original" story about Galbraith going to Vietnam in 1961 came from James K. Galbraith himself. At that time Kennedy was already dealing with the Bay of Pigs. He, (Kennedy) DID NOT INVOLVE himself as much in the Vietnam war as he did with Cuba in 1961. It was during this year of 1961 the administration was also sending "millions" of dollars to president Diem, had Kennedy sent Galbraith to Vietnam why then is there no mentioned of that in the minutes? Secondly, if Galbraith [had] gone to Vietnam, why then did he not report what Mansfield obviously saw what president Diem was doing with the money the United States was giving them? Just because of a few books that contradict themselves, don't know whether Galbraith is coming or going never left India. He did "observe" the war from afar, and wrote Kennedy how he felt about the war, that's it, that's as far as it went. History has this all wrong, after Kennedy received Galbraith's "letter" it was still a few months before Kennedy sent Mansfield to Vietnam to find out what's going on, surely, the president wouldn't need a second opinion about money being squandered in Vietnam would he? In closing, if you Mr. Burton read my number #48 post to Mrs. Beckett you would have [understood what I said to her, which should have helped in making up your mind,] with that I said, I did say, "it wouldn't happen again", your follow up posts only tells me that one, you read my post but didn't understand it, or two, you read my post, understood it, but, couldn't make up your mind. Which is it Mr. Burton? Introduction to NSAM 263 [JFK's Vietnam Withdrawal Policy] Introduction to NSAM 273 [LBJ's Reversal of NSAM 263] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Scott, Don't talk about silly wagers. If you have something which proves Greg wrong then provide it so everyone can read it and make up their own minds. If Greg is making an unsupported claim, ask him to provide the evidence to support the claim. Once again, readers can make up their own minds. I've already done this. The "original" story about Galbraith going to Vietnam in 1961 came from James K. Galbraith himself. At that time Kennedy was already dealing with the Bay of Pigs. He, (Kennedy) DID NOT INVOLVE himself as much in the Vietnam war as he did with Cuba in 1961. It was during this year of 1961 the administration was also sending "millions" of dollars to president Diem, had Kennedy sent Galbraith to Vietnam why then is there no mentioned of that in the minutes? Secondly, if Galbraith [had] gone to Vietnam, why then did he not report what Mansfield obviously saw what president Diem was doing with the money the United States was giving them? Just because of a few books that contradict themselves, don't know whether Galbraith is coming or going never left India. He did "observe" the war from afar, and wrote Kennedy how he felt about the war, that's it, that's as far as it went. History has this all wrong, after Kennedy received Galbraith's "letter" it was still a few months before Kennedy sent Mansfield to Vietnam to find out what's going on, surely, the president wouldn't need a second opinion about money being squandered in Vietnam would he? In closing, if you Mr. Burton read my number #48 post to Mrs. Beckett you would have [understood what I said to her, which should have helped in making up your mind,] with that I said, I did say, "it wouldn't happen again", your follow up posts only tells me that one, you read my post but didn't understand it, or two, you read my post, understood it, but, couldn't make up your mind. Which is it Mr. Burton? Introduction to NSAM 263 [JFK's Vietnam Withdrawal Policy] Introduction to NSAM 273 [LBJ's Reversal of NSAM 263] Greg, you really have a pretty sight I meant site, ha-ha. I bet you've spent a lot of time working on it, and thanks for backing up the NSAM withdraw policy I was discussing in post #57 which was based off Senator Mansfield's report. Edited March 6, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Scott, Don't talk about silly wagers. If you have something which proves Greg wrong then provide it so everyone can read it and make up their own minds. If Greg is making an unsupported claim, ask him to provide the evidence to support the claim. Once again, readers can make up their own minds. I've already done this. The "original" story about Galbraith going to Vietnam in 1961 came from James K. Galbraith himself. At that time Kennedy was already dealing with the Bay of Pigs. He, (Kennedy) DID NOT INVOLVE himself as much in the Vietnam war as he did with Cuba in 1961. It was during this year of 1961 the administration was also sending "millions" of dollars to president Diem, had Kennedy sent Galbraith to Vietnam why then is there no mentioned of that in the minutes? Secondly, if Galbraith [had] gone to Vietnam, why then did he not report what Mansfield obviously saw what president Diem was doing with the money the United States was giving them? Just because of a few books that contradict themselves, don't know whether Galbraith is coming or going never left India. He did "observe" the war from afar, and wrote Kennedy how he felt about the war, that's it, that's as far as it went. History has this all wrong, after Kennedy received Galbraith's "letter" it was still a few months before Kennedy sent Mansfield to Vietnam to find out what's going on, surely, the president wouldn't need a second opinion about money being squandered in Vietnam would he? In closing, if you Mr. Burton read my number #48 post to Mrs. Beckett you would have [understood what I said to her, which should have helped in making up your mind,] with that I said, I did say, "it wouldn't happen again", your follow up posts only tells me that one, you read my post but didn't understand it, or two, you read my post, understood it, but, couldn't make up your mind. Which is it Mr. Burton? Introduction to NSAM 263 [JFK's Vietnam Withdrawal Policy] Introduction to NSAM 273 [LBJ's Reversal of NSAM 263] Greg, you really have a pretty sight, I bet you've spent a lot of time working on it, and thanks for backing up the NSAM withdraw policy I was discussing in post #57 which was based off Senator Mansfield's report. It was not based off Senator Mansfield's report at all! It was officially the result of the McNamara / Taylor Trip Report. [Yes, that is Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Maxwell Taylor]. NSAM 263 even INCLUDES the precise section of their report--as the ONLY portion--that was approved by the president and which recommended the withdrawal of 1,000 personnel by the end of 1963 and all remaining personnel by the end of 1965! JFK was never--I repeat NEVER--in favor of American intervention in Indochina. Going back to his days in the House of Representatives and later to his days in the Senate, JFK consistently and vocally opposed American involvement in Vietnam. He gave an impassioned speech to the US Senate to that effect way back in 1954; a speech that described his position unequivocally. On September 6th of 1963 he tasked Foreign Service Officer Mendenhall and General Victor "Brute" Krulak to go on a fact finding tour of Vietnam and make their recommendation. They came to nearly opposite conclusions, with Mendenhall advising that the war effort was failing and Krulak insisting that the war effort, particularly the strength of the anti-Communist forces, was going well--so well, in fact, that Krulak advised that our withdrawal would have a positive effect on the GOV of SVN. JFK had made his mind up BEFORE he took office that extricating the US from Vietnam (without appearing to be soft on communism) was essential. That is why he disregarded Mendenhall's recommendation and embraced Krulak's instead. Such an approach would have allowed him to "claim victory" and bring our boys home had he lived. After he decided on complete withdrawal by the end of 1965, JFK knew that he would need the "recommendation to withdraw" to appear to have its genesis in the top ranking US military establishment or else he would look soft on communism. Thus he had Krulak and Prouty write the content of the subsequent "McNamara / Taylor Trip Report." It was THAT report that "officially" contained the "military's own recommendation" to withdraw. Please read this JFK speech (mentioned above) and decide for yourself if he was firmly committed to keeping the US out of a ground war in Asia. Edited March 6, 2016 by Greg Burnham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now