PeterS

The NY Times just came out with a story on how Nixon interfered with the Paris Peace Talks in 68 as he was afraid that if Johnson managed to bring about peace it would throw the election to the democrats. And while I don't find that surprising given his actions in 72 I would like to remind everyone that 22,000 more Americans died in Vietnam after 1968. The question I have is whether his actions were treasonous and what is so important about power that men would be willing to commit it in order to have some--though be it all so temporary?

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/nixon-tried-to-spoil-johnsons-vietnam-peace-talks-in-68-notes-show.html?_r=0

Richard M. Nixon told an aide that they should find a way to secretly “monkey wrench” peace talks in Vietnam in the waning days of the 1968 campaign for fear that progress toward ending the war would hurt his chances for the presidency, according to newly discovered notes.

In a telephone conversation with H. R. Haldeman, who would go on to become White House chief of staff, Nixon gave instructions that a friendly intermediary should keep “working on” South Vietnamese leaders to persuade them not to agree to a deal before the election, according to the notes, taken by Mr. Haldeman.

The Nixon campaign’s clandestine effort to thwart President Lyndon B. Johnson’s peace initiative that fall has long been a source of controversy and scholarship. Ample evidence has emerged documenting the involvement of Nixon’s campaign. But Mr. Haldeman’s notes appear to confirm longstanding suspicions that Nixon himself was directly involved, despite his later denials....

Loki Loc: Georgia

You mean the Lyndon Johnson "peace initiative" in which he turned the 10,000 or so troops that Kennedy had in mind into 500,000? THAT initiative?
There is no doubt that Nixon was a bastard. LBJ was an even bigger one.

PeterS

Johnson acted because he thought it the right thing to do. Nixon acted because he thirsted for political power.
I think you and I have different definitions for what it is to be a bastard...

Loki Loc: Georgia

Apparently so; Had Johnson been a Republican, he would have been a bastard also. Since he was a Liberal Democrat, he gets a pass on his parentage.

PeterS

No, Johnson gets passage because he thought what he was doing was for the good of the country. While I disagree with what he did I'm not going to fault him for trying to end the war. I will however, fault Nixon for trying to lengthen the war solely for his political benefit. That shows someone who is just pure evil...

Loki Loc: Georgia

How does escalating US involvement from less than 10,000 to more than a half million constitute ending? I still remember LBJ on the news, stating that "he was not going to send American boys to do the job that Vietnamese boys ought to be doing."

astrolite

Peter, I am old enough to remember the "Paris PeaceTalks" both for Vietnam. AND. Korea. The same communist delaying tactics used both times....there never was any intent to reach a joint agreement. Just stall until their side was reenforced. And.....ANYTHING from the NY Times is a lie.....NOTHING can be believed.

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

LBJ wasn't about to end the war because he and his old bat dingy bird johnson were making a ton of money !

Homestead

"The question I have is whether his actions were treasonous and what is so important about power that men would be willing to commit it in order to have some--though be it all so temporary?"

Gee.....I don't know, why don't you try asking Obama?

Leaked audio: Obama wanted ISIS to grow
Kerry also admitted U.S. helped arm jihadists
http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/leaked-audio-obama-wanted-isis-to-grow/#WGOSASbg41A1vXTm.99

Rivers

Let's dig him up and impeach him!

PeterS

It was Johnson's Paris Peace Talks that Nixon scuttled. Again, no matter how misguided, Johnson took steps that he thought was best for the country and was trying to end his mistake. Nixon scuttled Johnson's attempts for peace all because he thought peace would harm his chance to be president.

Think what you want about Johnson--it's Nixon who allowed thousands of Americans to die solely so he could be elected president. I titled this thread--At What Price Power--because it was American citizens who were asked to pay the price for Nixon's lust for political power. If you think Johnson's blunder equal to Nixon's use of American blood to become president than I have to disagree. I don't see that there is much more to discuss so I would suggest we agree to disagree and move on...

PeterS

The Korean war began in June of 1950 and ended in July of 53. What delay are you talking about? We will never know if N Vietnam was serious because Nixon worked to scuttle the peace talks. That's why the transgression was so serious. As for the NY Times--my only interest is the article. If you have proof that it was fabricated then what is it? If you simply don't trust the NY Times--well I really can't help you with that...

PeterS

All I heard was broken audio that was completely garbled. Did you piss on it after you dubbed it?

And ISIS wasn't the only faction that was fighting Assad and in fact ISIS was more interested in fighting the Kurds and Syrian Nationals than they were Assad so what would be Obama's reason to arm them? Also, ISIS got a ton of arms when the Iraqi army cut and ran. How do you know that what ever American arms ISIS gained wasn't obtained from the Iraqis themselves?

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

There was no chance of peace in 1968 during the Tet Offensive and everyone knew it including LBJ the great CIC that tied one hand behind out backs !

Homestead

I believe that you have a hearing problem, It's probably related to your learning problem.