Jump to content
The Education Forum

Vietnam Declassified: Kennedy, Johnson,Nixon


Recommended Posts

Kennedy  started  his withdrawal plan in April of 1962  with the relay of the Galbraith report to McNamara.

One month later, McNamara formally began the withdrawal plan with his instructions to Harkins.  

After the Sec Def Conference, in May of 1963, and until his death, Kennedy never issued new instructions for anything else.

In fact, he requested an evacuation plan for American personnel from Vietnam in late 1963 since he and McNamara feared Hanoi would overrun the south before the withdrawal plan was completed. (I discuss this in the GIglio interview.)

Therefore, in practical terms, the overthrow that JFK was deceived into backing had no impact on the withdrawal plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 7/7/2017 at 6:32 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Kennedy  started  his withdrawal plan in April of 1962  with the relay of the Galbraith report to McNamara.

One month later, McNamara formally began the withdrawal plan with his instructions to Harkins.  

After the Sec Def Conference, in May of 1963, and until his death, Kennedy never issued new instructions for anything else.

In fact, he requested an evacuation plan for American personnel from Vietnam in late 1963 since he and McNamara feared Hanoi would overrun the south before the withdrawal plan was completed. (I discuss this in the GIglio interview.)

Therefore, in practical terms, the overthrow that JFK was deceived into backing had no impact on the withdrawal plan.

The truth of that only goes so far.

<quote on>

"Today's World Report: Truce Moves Reported In Viet Nam," New York World-Telegram & Sun, (Friday), 25 October 1963, p.6: "LONDON - The government of South Vietnam and Communist North Viet Nam are apparently making exploratory contacts that could lead to a truce, diplomatic sources said. There was no official confirmation…Diplomatic sources said the current moves were believed to be aiming at some sort of truce arrangement with possible wider ramifications."

<quote off>

The overthrow and murder of Diem had an obvious impact on Diem's plans to negotiate peace with the North and the inevitable withdrawal of US troops.

Kennedy's policy of regime change in Saigon contributed greatly to the Vietnam War.

Kennedy was deceived on August 24, but by failing to fire all the deceivers he must take responsibility for the regime change policy.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
On 6/12/2017 at 1:57 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Good Ron.  

Let me know what you think.  To my knowledge, this is the first time anyone has a done comparative study like this with the newest declassified documents.

Thanks Jim, for encouraging me to post here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2017 at 12:33 AM, Ron Bulman said:

Last fall I spent the night in Kilgore Texas on personal business in a hotel North of town.  It and a hotel next door were the only business in that area except a tiny liquor store in the parking lot between them which looked much older than either hotel but still well kept.  After the 250 mile drive in somewhat heavy traffic (heavy in the Dallas part) I thought I'm going to have one beer and kick back an hour before I look for something to eat.  I was wearing the cap in my avatar, USS John F. Kennedy, CV-67, the only thing I found worthy of buying the last time I was in the sixth floor Owsald did it by himself museum souvenir shop other than a replica campaign refrigerator magnet.  The place said open but the door didn't.  I saw a man older than I behind the counter get up, heard a buzz and pushed the door open. He was wearing a NAVY cap.  I said "I guess maybe you were really in the Navy, people ask me when I wear this one sometimes if I served on the ship but I have to tell them no, it's a souvenir from the TSBD in Dallas, but I had a couple of cousins in Vietnam, other family in other wars.  As he handed me my change he looked me in the eye and said "I first went there in 1959".  It took me 3-4 seconds to ask "Unacknowledged?".  He told me "They told us if you get caught your on your own, we don't know you".  I forget what I said but he also told me he had a buddy that got out before he did that told him when he was discharged he asked the officer "What about all that time in Asia, why isn't that on my record?  The officer responded "That didn't happen, you weren't there".

Several weeks later I had a thought.  I wonder if JFK was ever fully apprised of what was going on in Vietnam.  He knew about the "non combat" advisors but was he aware of what "his" CIA was doing?  Did Dulles inform him of the full scope of their involvement?  It's pretty well proven Dulles knew the Bay of Pigs was a plan to fail but JFK was led to believe otherwise by him and the Military as another example of their deceptiveness, so, I'd guess not.    

Maybe I was bit more naive then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like what Oliver did with this aspect in the long version of the film, JFK:Destiny Betrayed. 

With Galbraith and Newman, it was really credible.  Plus the documents we showed about the Sec/Def conference in May of 1963.

This was one of the points of debate I had with Chomsky and Buzzanco.  To me this is silly to even debate today. With all the declassifications on the subject its simply a proven fact.  I did not know that Galbraith actually requested the October tapings be declassified, where McNamara says: We have to find a way to get out of Vietnam. 

Does it get any more clear than that?

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was recently reminded US involvement began in Vietnam well before JFK's election.  Dien Ben Phu?  Thousands of advisors on the ground when he took office.  Overseen by Dulles(s)/Nixon under Eisenhower.  Who then warned us of the Military Industrial Complex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was the Eisenhower administration that reneged on the Geneva Accords, and then set up the Nhu brothers to run this new country South Vietnam, which did not exist at the time.  We created it.

And in my view, you could hardly have picked a worse trio to run it: DIem, Nhu and Madame Nhu.

And the guy behind it all was Lansdale.  It was really a CIA creation from the start.  Lansdale once said something like, I don't understand how people complain about not having a democracy, when in fact I was sent to set up a fascist dictatorship.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my debate with Buzzanco, this was one of the points I was trying to make.

Foster Dulles had no room for neutrality in the Third World.  Kennedy did.

For example: the installment of Diem came through a recommendation by William Douglas to the CIA officer Robert Amory.  So when France fell, Bao Dai had little choice but to pick Diem since he knew the USA was now in the driver's seat.  When Diem arrived in Saigon, Lansdale was waiting for him. He knew there was going to be trouble though since Diem decided to ride to the presidential palace behind a curtain in a closed limousine.

The French did not want Diem.  They favored a guy named Phan Huy Quat.  Who was really a democratic leader.  So what did DIem do?  He had him arrested after trying to rig the election against him for congress.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Placing JFK into any reasonable context---it is inconceivable JFK would have put 500,000 troops into Vietnam, produced 60,000 American dead and 6 million dead SE Asians. 

Sure, JFK flubbed sometimes in his presidency, he was human. He should have been far more skeptical of the whole Bay of Pigs deal, and should have not been drawn into Vietnam even with advisors. Hindsight is perfect, btw.  The temper of times was hot to the extreme. For example, JFK was advised to conduct an unprovoked first nuke strike on the Soviet Union. 

But 500,000 US troops in Vietnam? Not possible. 

Sadly, even LBJ knew within a couple of years he was on an hideous fool's errand (conversations with Russell), and then Nixon delayed the inevitable for four years to ensure his re-election. 

I'll tell you what the take-away is: Yes, the globalists (multinationals) largely run DC foreign-trade-military policy, and are far more powerful today than in 1963. Usually, there is no regime change in DC even if the White House changes hands from Donks to 'Phants. 

JFK was the outlier. He had served in war, knew what it was. (Imagine a billionaire's son serving in the military ever again, not going to happen). JFK was extremely intelligent, aware of international commerce, and the machinations of state.  He did not want US foreign policy to be the extension of corporate interests or a self-serving national security state (usually aligned corporate interests). 

The loss of JFK is incalculable. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, its just not thinkable to imagine JFK would have done anything like Johnson did.

He was much too knowledgeable about what happened to France a decade earlier.

I mean he was there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...