| American politics 15:36 - May 15 with 1642 views | Perublue |
Perhaps a naive and incorrect view but those who know about these things I´d be interested in their opinions...The Democrats and Republicans .. I always presumued the Republicans to be a bit more hawkish and up for military action whenever possible but the Democrats seem much more that way inclined over the last decade or so...am I way off the mark and is there any reasons either way for standpoints by the the two parties am I generalising too much ? [Post edited 15 May 2023 15:38]
|  |
| |  |
| American politics on 17:31 - May 15 with 1535 views | DJR |
I suppose things change over time. For example, the Republicans opposed slavery in the 19th Century whilst the Democrats supported it, and even supported segregation until the 1960s. |  | | |
| American politics on 20:58 - May 15 with 1439 views | Oldsmoker |
In my lifetime a chequered history for both parties.
JFK (Democrat) and the Bay of pigs - that's Cuba, Russians and nukes.
Lyndon B Johnson (Democrat) and the escalation of the Vietnam war.
Nixon (Republican) ended the Vietnam war.
Reagan (Republican) and Nicaragua + Grenada.
George Bush (Republican) Iraq
George W Bush (Republican) Afghanistan, Iraq 2 the sequel.
Obama (Democrat) Syria |  |
| |
| American politics on 21:25 - May 15 with 1413 views | HARRY10 |
It depends on what the interests of US capital are, and what are seen as the most suitable means to defend them, at any given time. [Post edited 15 May 2023 21:26]
|  | | |
| American politics on 22:06 - May 15 with 1397 views | tractordownsouth |
Generally it's the centre-right and centre-left that favour military intervention whereas those on the fringes of the spectrum prefer isolationism. The Republicans' anti-interventionist streak is a symptom of the party's move to the far right under Trump. |  |
| |
| American politics on 22:24 - May 15 with 1380 views | bluelagos |
| American politics on 20:58 - May 15 by Oldsmoker |
In my lifetime a chequered history for both parties.
JFK (Democrat) and the Bay of pigs - that's Cuba, Russians and nukes.
Lyndon B Johnson (Democrat) and the escalation of the Vietnam war.
Nixon (Republican) ended the Vietnam war.
Reagan (Republican) and Nicaragua + Grenada.
George Bush (Republican) Iraq
George W Bush (Republican) Afghanistan, Iraq 2 the sequel.
Obama (Democrat) Syria |
Nixon had resigned in disgrace before the end of the Vietnam war.
Documentary maker Ken Burns exposed Nixon as very much responsible for the war continuing by his scuppering peace talks to help with his election. He knew it was a war the US couldn't win, but carried on irrespective.
That Nixon was a war mingering piece of sh1t was my take on Ken Burns' films (well worth watching - is on youtube i think) [Post edited 15 May 2023 22:34]
|  |
| |
| American politics on 07:42 - May 16 with 1286 views | wkj |
American Politics is interesting really as in history the republicans were once more liberal leaning, now they are the nationalism focussed party. It is a bipartisan system and RARELY do you see a third party make any ground in the house or senate. As such, both the Republican and Democrats are always sliding between moderate and far right or left.
You will often see states breaking rank for state governors too. For example Kansas is a republican state through and through and are usually safe seats in the senate and congress, but a number of times they have appointed democrat governors. [Post edited 16 May 2023 7:47]
|  |
| |
| American politics on 07:45 - May 16 with 1282 views | Dubtractor |
| American politics on 22:24 - May 15 by bluelagos |
Nixon had resigned in disgrace before the end of the Vietnam war.
Documentary maker Ken Burns exposed Nixon as very much responsible for the war continuing by his scuppering peace talks to help with his election. He knew it was a war the US couldn't win, but carried on irrespective.
That Nixon was a war mingering piece of sh1t was my take on Ken Burns' films (well worth watching - is on youtube i think) [Post edited 15 May 2023 22:34]
|
That Ken Burns Vietnam doc is compelling and terrible viewing. |  |
| |
| American politics on 07:51 - May 16 with 1275 views | bluelagos |
| American politics on 07:45 - May 16 by Dubtractor |
That Ken Burns Vietnam doc is compelling and terrible viewing. |
Isn't it.
The big question for me (from the series) was all around patriotism. Who are the real patriots, those encouraging young men to fight a war or those standing up to the American authorities and demanding troop withdrawal?
The one who wears a military uniform or the long haired hippy dodging plastic bullets at the university campus demos/riots
And then to today we demonise those brave enough to risk imprisonment for demonstrating on environmental issues. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| American politics on 08:01 - May 16 with 1267 views | Oldsmoker |
| American politics on 22:24 - May 15 by bluelagos |
Nixon had resigned in disgrace before the end of the Vietnam war.
Documentary maker Ken Burns exposed Nixon as very much responsible for the war continuing by his scuppering peace talks to help with his election. He knew it was a war the US couldn't win, but carried on irrespective.
That Nixon was a war mingering piece of sh1t was my take on Ken Burns' films (well worth watching - is on youtube i think) [Post edited 15 May 2023 22:34]
|
The Vietnam war officially ended for the US in Jan 1973 when both Vietnam (North and South) and US signed a peace agreement. Nixon was still in office.
That was officially the end of US involvement in the war.
North and South Vietnam continued to fight each other.
It definitely ended when North Vietnamese forces entered Saigon in 1975. Nixon had resigned by then.
I agree that Nixon was a war mongerer.
In December 1972, he sent a happy christmas present in the form of thousands of tonnes of bombs dropped on North Vietnam cities - many Civilian casualties. That was to try to persuade North Vietnam to sign the peace treaty, which they did 1 month later. A peaceful president would have ceased hostilities to show good faith but Nixon didn't. | |
| |
| American politics on 08:13 - May 16 with 1239 views | bluelagos |
| American politics on 08:01 - May 16 by Oldsmoker |
The Vietnam war officially ended for the US in Jan 1973 when both Vietnam (North and South) and US signed a peace agreement. Nixon was still in office.
That was officially the end of US involvement in the war.
North and South Vietnam continued to fight each other.
It definitely ended when North Vietnamese forces entered Saigon in 1975. Nixon had resigned by then.
I agree that Nixon was a war mongerer.
In December 1972, he sent a happy christmas present in the form of thousands of tonnes of bombs dropped on North Vietnam cities - many Civilian casualties. That was to try to persuade North Vietnam to sign the peace treaty, which they did 1 month later. A peaceful president would have ceased hostilities to show good faith but Nixon didn't. |
You should defo catch up on the doc if you haven't already.
Can't remember the exact details (someone will correct me if wrong) but Burns uncovered released documents which definitely showed that Nixon lied in the election (68?) and took the position that peace talks were failing. When he got to power he could have engaged with those but knew it would undermine his presidency and so allowed the war to carry on.
He did so knowing it was an unwinnable war and so was responsible for 4 additional years of bloodshed. Some people make bad calls, bad judgements, but this was very much an informed position all about his political survival which he judged more important than the lives of young soldiers and Vietnamese civilians.
Fascinating history and one many lived through, am just too young to remember any of it, my first memories of conflict being Northern Ireland and the Falklands. | |
| |
| American politics on 08:52 - May 16 with 1222 views | baxterbasics |
The Trumpy element has hijacked the republican party much like the Corbyn/Momentum wing did for Labour until quite recently.
Trumpism (if there is such a thing) seems to be more inward looking and protectionist ('America First'). Less inclined to be going on foreign adventures. Less supportive of NATO, or supporting the likes of Ukraine.
Which is a switch from the old school republicans of the Reagan/Bush era.
But regardless of party, US Presidents will always be tempted to use foreign conflict as a distraction from domestic headaches. They have more power to act arbitrarily abroad then they do at home where they always need support of congress to get anything done. |  |
| |
| American politics on 10:41 - May 16 with 1182 views | Oldsmoker |
| American politics on 08:13 - May 16 by bluelagos |
You should defo catch up on the doc if you haven't already.
Can't remember the exact details (someone will correct me if wrong) but Burns uncovered released documents which definitely showed that Nixon lied in the election (68?) and took the position that peace talks were failing. When he got to power he could have engaged with those but knew it would undermine his presidency and so allowed the war to carry on.
He did so knowing it was an unwinnable war and so was responsible for 4 additional years of bloodshed. Some people make bad calls, bad judgements, but this was very much an informed position all about his political survival which he judged more important than the lives of young soldiers and Vietnamese civilians.
Fascinating history and one many lived through, am just too young to remember any of it, my first memories of conflict being Northern Ireland and the Falklands. |
I see what you're saying.
History says Nixon signed the peace agreement in 73 but he could have done that 4 years earlier and chose not to.
In 72, I was 18 and had joined the SWP. We had a weekly discussion group and talked about all sorts of topics. All my comrades had known for the last 5 years that the Vietnam war was unwinnable.
Edit : My SWP colleagues were at the Grosvenor Square demo and so proud of that they never stopped reminding me (boring me) with that. [Post edited 16 May 2023 10:44]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
