Re: VIRTUAL JFK: Vietnam Had Kennedy Lived

For sure.

I have a book about the assassination of both JFK & Diem.

Is that a coincidence?

"Anthony Marsh" <anthony_marsh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:POKdnVzuGvx-vYbVnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Simone wrote:
> Well, when we exited the cinema to walk to an Italian ice cream cafe in
a 
> trendy part of my town, I was telling one of my friends that I still 
> wasn't very convinced that JFK would have totally removed the troops.
>
> My friend quoted one scene in the do***entary where JFK said that the US

> would get involved militarily if they were attacked or an ally was 
> attacked. On that basis, my friend believed that JFK would not have
pulled 
> out of VN.
>

The US was already involved militarily since 1950 and even in WWII with 
the OSS. Kennedy had set into motion the plans to withdraw all US troops 
by 1965. What you can argue is that later events would have forestalled or

obviated his plans. But then the changing events caused by JFK's 
assassination and Johnson's escalation changed all the assumptions that 
people rely on when evaluating what JFK would have done.

> I then asked, 'But was VN actually attacked?'.
>
>
> <billclarke@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:6b0f610e-35b4-4ace-a9b2-99d48a3598ac@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Apr 29, 5:30 pm, "Gerry Simone" <newdecent...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> See bottom.
>>
>> <billcla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>>
news:164c0bdf-5795-4d4e-a0c6-e9ee90032ec2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Apr 28, 7:33 pm, "Gerry Simone" <newdecent...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> The Gulf War (forcing back an invader) and Iraq (guerilla/civil war)
are
>>> completely different wars.
>> True but the invasion part of the Iraq war was as conventional warfare
>> as you’ll see. That is easy for the U.S. When that Fool stood on
>> that ****p and said mission accomplished I cringed because I knew we
>> were just getting started and the hard part was ahead.
>>
>> Yeah, unfortunately. It's tough when the people really don't want
>> democracy or have any hope for it.
>>
>>> So 300,000 troops would stop the insurgency forever?
>>> How long would that take?
>> They didn’t allow me into the meeting so I don’t know what their
thinking
>> was on this. Obviously we didn’t have enough troops to secure the
>> capital, much less the country side. This isn’t a matter of
overwhelming
>> force but simply of having enough troops to do the job.
>>
>>> Bear any burden doesn't mean the use of force unless one is attacked
and
>>> that there is a clear and present danger.
>> Are we speaking of Iraq or Vietnam?
>>
>> Could be both.
>>
>>> JFK is also quoted in this movie as saying that force would only be
used
>>> if the US or its allies were attacked.
>> South Vietnam was an ally and they were certainly attacked.
>>
>> Were they attacked after the U.S. bombed North Vietnam/Hanoi?
>>
>
> In 1959 the communist big dogs decided to begin armed operations in
> South Vietnam.  The 10,000 stay behinds (the first violation of the
> Geneva Accords btw) were down to 2,500 at this time and had been
> begging the north to allow them armed operations.  The North also
> begin sending down the 80,000 or so communist that had gone north
> after the Accords.  I don’t know if you would call it an invasion
> since they once lived in the South but it of course changed the nature
> of the war.
>
> The first intact NVA units moved into SVN in 1964, before the Tokin
> Gulf incident and before the U.S. bombing campaign begin.
>
> Bill Clarke
>
>
>
>