JFK got the U.S into Vietnam (not Johnson)

[Gerry Down]

JFK biographer Mr. Reeves says JFK caused the Vietnam war by authorizing the overthrow of Diem which occurred on Nov 1st 1963. 29-35 minutes on the below video:

This goes very much against the narrative James Douglas portrays in his book JFK And The Unspeakable in which he portrays JFK as a peace-loving hippie.

I wonder if JFK thought he could settle things in Vietnam using the overthrow in order to prevent Vietnam becoming an issue at the 1964 election. If so it was a very selfish thing to do as alot of people got killed in that war. Not of course did he intend that to happen, but he may have started the whole thing just to try and help him win the 1964 election.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

JFK biographer Mr. Reeves says JFK caused the Vietnam war by authorizing the overthrow of Diem which occurred on Nov 1st 1963. 29-35 minutes on the below video:

This goes very much against the narrative James Douglas portrays in his book JFK And The Unspeakable in which he portrays JFK as a peace-loving hippie.

I wonder if JFK thought he could settle things in Vietnam using the overthrow in order to prevent Vietnam becoming an issue at the 1964 election. If so it was a very selfish thing to do as alot of people got killed in that war. Not of course did he intend that to happen, but he may have started the whole thing just to try and help him win the 1964 election.

It seems to me that JFK's support for the removal of Diem (and his brother) undercuts the allegation that he had decided by November to leave Vietnam, to withdraw US forces. If he made that decision then why deepen US involvement by supporting a coup? What was the purpose of a coup if the plan was to leave? As Reeves argues, supporting the Diem removal is akin to Colin Powell's observation about Iraq - "If you break it, you own it." If you remove the government, if you essentially "break it", then you have an obligation to put one back together. Or try to. Which is what LBJ tried to do afterwards.

Furthermore, if JFK had not made a decision to leave at that time then the argument that he was assassinated by "them" - the CIA, the Pentagon, the "National Security State" - because he was going to leave is completely undermined. He's not made a decision to leave so there's no reason to murder him because he was going "soft on communism". Maybe at a later date he was; but on November 22, 1963 he had not made that decision.

Robert Kennedy pointed out in 1964 the problem they faced with Diem and the aftermath of his removal, a problem that LBJ inherited:

"[T]he situation began to deteriorate in the spring of 1962, uh, spring of 1963. I think David Halberstam, from the New York Times' articles, had a strong effect on molding public opinion: the fact that the situation was unsatisfactory. Our problem was that thinking of Halberstam sort of as the Ma-- what Matthews [NY Times reporter Herbert Matthews] did in Cuba, that Batista [Fulgencio R. Batista] was not very satisfactory, but the important thing was to try to get somebody who could replace him and somebody who could keep, continue the war and keep the country united, and that was far more difficult. So that was what was of great concern to all of us during this period of time. Nobody liked Diem particularly, but how to get rid of him and get somebody that would continue the war, not split the country in two, and therefore lose not only the war but the country. That was the great problem.

Again, the key sentence:  "...the important thing was to try to get somebody who could replace him and somebody who could keep, continue the war and keep the country united, and that was far more difficult. So that was what was of great concern to all of us during this period of time."

The Administration plan was to "try to get somebody who could replace him." That's not something you're going to do, it seems to me, if the decision was made to leave. Here RFK is admitting that the plan - at that time - was to try to "keep the country united" in a post-Diem regime. And the US would be staying there to do just that.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Supporting RFK's views above, the Pentagon Papers, the historical account of US involvement in Vietnam that was ordered by McNamara, has this key passage on the question of Diem's removal:

This is from the section titled "Evolution of the War":
"In the course of these policy debates [i.e., how to deal with Diem], several participants pursued the logical but painful conclusion that if the war could not be won with Diem, and if his removal would lead to political chaos and also jeopardize the war effort, then the war was probably unwinnable. If that were the case, the argument went, then the U.S. should really be facing a more basic decision of either an orderly disengagement from an irretrievable situation, or a major escalation of the U.S. involvement, including the use of U.S. combat troops."

It continues: "These prophetic minority voices were, however, raising an unpleasant prospect that the [Kennedy] Administration was unprepared to face at that time. In hindsight, however, it is clear that this was one of the times in the history of our Vietnam involvement when we were making fundamental choices. The option to disengage honorably at that time now appears an attractively low-cost one. But for the Kennedy Administration the costs no doubt appeared much higher. In any event, it proved to be unwilling to accept the implications of predictions for a bleak future. The Administration hewed to the belief that if the US be but willing to exercise its power, it could ultimately have its way in world affairs."

For emphasis: "The Administration hewed to the belief that if the US be but willing to exercise its power, it could ultimately have its way in world affairs."

Link here: ttps://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-Part-IV-B-5.pdf

[Brian Walker]

JFK biographer Mr. Reeves says JFK caused the Vietnam war by authorizing the overthrow of Diem which occurred on Nov 1st 1963. 29-35 minutes on the below video:

This goes very much against the narrative James Douglas portrays in his book JFK And The Unspeakable in which he portrays JFK as a peace-loving hippie.

I wonder if JFK thought he could settle things in Vietnam using the overthrow in order to prevent Vietnam becoming an issue at the 1964 election. If so it was a very selfish thing to do as alot of people got killed in that war. Not of course did he intend that to happen, but he may have started the whole thing just to try and help him win the 1964 election.

[Brian Walker]

JFK biographer Mr. Reeves says JFK caused the Vietnam war by authorizing the overthrow of Diem which occurred on Nov 1st 1963. 29-35 minutes on the below video:

This goes very much against the narrative James Douglas portrays in his book JFK And The Unspeakable in which he portrays JFK as a peace-loving hippie.

I wonder if JFK thought he could settle things in Vietnam using the overthrow in order to prevent Vietnam becoming an issue at the 1964 election. If so it was a very selfish thing to do as alot of people got killed in that war. Not of course did he intend that to happen, but he may have started the whole thing just to try and help him win the 1964 election.

The argument made by CT that JFK was pulling out of Vietnam is all you need to know about their arguments. They cherry pick to try and back that narrative.  No good argument can be made that JFK was about to pull out of Vietnam until the communists were defeated.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

The argument made by CT that JFK was pulling out of Vietnam is all you need to know about their arguments. They cherry pick to try and back that narrative.  No good argument can be made that JFK was about to pull out of Vietnam until the communists were defeated.

Or until the South could defend itself with us helping (they provide the troops, we provide the training and weapons) - which was the goal; or until it was determined to be a hopeless war. But as RFK said and the Pentagon Papers show, in November of '63 it looked "difficult" but still winnable. There was no need - at that time - to pull out.

Why would JFK simply decide to leave when the outcome was unknown? And why support Diem's removal if you are going to leave? RFK again pointed out the thinking: we remove Diem and get a capable government and it's winnable. Difficult but winnable.

Moreover, JFK's public rhetoric limited his actions. He repeatedly stated a defense of the South was in US national interest. That a loss would lead to the "dominoes" falling throughout the region. And that Mao's China - who they thought was behind the North's actions - would benefit. All of this made, JFK pointed out, the defense of Saigon necessary for the US.

There's nothing to indicate for me - not in McNamara's biography or Rusk's or Bundy's or the Pentagon Papers - that this was just public relations rhetoric to fight off the charge of "Who Lost China" with Vietnam being the replacement for China. His top advisers said there was no discussion at that time of leaving.

The conspiracists can still argue - John Newman does - that the conspirators killed JFK because they THOUGHT he was going to leave. They admit that JFK had not yet made that decision but given his actions in Laos and Cuba, where he refused to send in troops, that the assassins concluded that he was going to at some point. And it was for this that they assassinated him.

[Colin Crow]

From the domino theory to the domino room?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

From the domino theory to the domino room?

If we truly live in a computer simulation then somebody's messing with us.

I always wondered (not really but let's go with it) that the people running this simulation left for a while and their two six year old boys got control of things. And they're doing what six year olds tend to do if not supervised. What else explains this craziness going on? At least here in the US.

Recall that line by King Lear?: "As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods. They kill us for their sport."