why do the republicans want to be the war party

[letme]

Hilldy is on record for war with Iran also.

 

[bynm27]

this infuriates me. if bush leads us into a war with iran we might as well be nuke magnets cuz we are gonna be hated and looked at as even more trouble makers

 

[iman]

Wars are good politics in America. What good patriotic soul wouldn't rally around a defender of God & Country.

The Republicans don't have a popular agenda for the country so they must always evoke the "other", the foreign or domestic enemy that the American people must be defended against.

The "other" might be the commies, Socialists, Internationalists, the UN, the Russians, the Chinese, the French, Blacks, Orientals, Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Irish, Islamo-Fascists, Mexicans, Gays, Liberals, and on and on. The Republicans are very democratic in this regard, everyone gets their chance in the barrel.

I guess the real question is: Why are Americans so paranoid, so fearful of differences, so susceptible to leaders invoking fear?

 

[star-warrior]

I'd further state they ain't so good at, you know, PAYING for wars, either. As to fighting in the wars they start, well, cowardice is is own reward, I suppose, because when one looks at all the loud-mouthed arm chair generals on the right, not a God damned one of them served their nation. Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Bolten, Card, Rove, none of these weak sisters fought. As to the extremist cheerleaders? Scum like Brit Hume, Sean Hannitee-hee, Limbaugh, Kristol, all of them dodged the draft or otherwise failed to put their lives on the line. Not a SINGLE MEMBER of the Bush family, not one, is in the military.

Why don't you vote yourself back into being a subject of Her Majesty of the UK? At least her family enjoys close ties and serves with the military

 

[iman]

Johnson expanded the Vietnam War and was driven from office. Nixon was elected in 1968 with his pledge to end the war with honor or at least without losing (the so called "secret plan to end the war"). The war continued and it was obvious that the plan was just an election year promise. Nixon was elected again in 1972 with another pledge to end the war and finally in 1973 the Peace Accord was signed in Paris.

Nixon presided over most the war and unnecessarily prolonged the war for domestic political purposes. It was also the Republicans among the citizenry that supported the war despite the war's obvious futility. It was a Republican war.

Incidentally, it is now the Republican revisionists that are spinning the absurd notion that America lost Vietnam because liberal activists forced the Ford Administration to "surrender".

 

[SantaCBear]

^^ Everyone should see "Path To War" if you havent.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0218505/

Besides the content the acting was very good and also the directing...

 

[MystikWizard]

Hilldy is on record for war with Iran also.

You are absolutely correct. Hillary is a Pro War Candidate and she will march us to War with Iran. She has gone back and forth with Iraq so many times, it leaves your head spinning. So who knows where she stands there, because it changes every other day.

If you honestly want us out of the War in Iraq and do not want us marching to war with Iran ... DO NOT vote for Hillary Clinton. And don't take my word for it. Go onto YouTube and do the research on her. Her flip flops are on tape. And take a look at her voting record on all the bills pertaining to these wars, and you will see that she has been a consistent supporter of them.

I am voting for a Presidential Candidate that is in fact a Republican and who is Against this War and has been Against the War from the very beginning. I'm not going to mention that person's name, even though I have from time to time, because I don't want this post being contrived as me trying to steer the attention away from Hillary for the benefit of my candidate.

Rather, I just want people to understand that Hillary has proved time and time again that she is a Pro War candidate, despite the lies that come out of her mouth, and am simply asking everyone to research her and inform yourselves. That's all. Please choose carefully as we've already had 8 years of Hell. We don't need another 8 years of this crap.

 

[NineOfClubs]

"Everyone," you exclaim? "Johnson's war?" I think not! Every Republican called it Johnson's war, but not "everyone" termed it LBJ's. Indeed, many call the Vietnam War "The Republican/Nixon War."

Revisionist, much?

Who writes this stuff for you, former Tass and Pravda journalists?

As one alive at that time, I never heard it called a republican war, and certainly I can remember the chants (on my own campus) of "Hey, hey LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?"

Anyway, a link to troop levels:

http://members.aol.com/warlibrary/vwatl.htm

Highest under Johnson, and reduced every year by Nixon until the war's end.

I might also remind you that Nixon's Republicans put an end to the Democrats draft and instituted our present all-volunteer military.

 

[NineOfClubs]

^Can we leave history behind us?

After all the Republicans managed to end the Civil War and win the Spanish-American War, but those were different people in different times.

I think there are enough current reasons to "hate" the Republicans (and the Democrats, for that matter).

P.S. The VietNam War was one I opposed strongly and early in the spring of '67, or earlier. In my high school class of 130 or so, there were only two of us against the war at that time. Speaking against it in class didn't gain me many points. And, I didn't live in a well-to-do area, we were working class and mostly Democrats. The first, and only, bumper sticker I had on a vehicle was one of those McCarthy daisies, which I should have stocked up on because they might be worth something now.

 

[jackoroe]

^You fail to mention that working class dems of that era were very different people than they are today, not nearly as left wing goofy. Much more like normal people!

 

[LaloGS]

Is the Korean conflict over? Uh. . .? Uh? Have I been asleep that long?

 

[SantaCBear]

^You fail to mention that working class dems of that era were very different people than they are today, not nearly as left wing goofy. Much more like normal people!

They became Reagan Democrats...

 

[LaloGS]

Actually, Eisenhower sent advisers to Viet Nam, to help the French who were fighting the growing communist insurgency, sponsored by China and the USSR, and when Kennedy took office, he sent a few more. When he was assassinated, and LBJ took office, he escalated the troop levels in the country because the French flaked out and left. Since he did not seek a second term, he left office (yes, we did shout: "Hey, Hey, LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?") and Johnson was shamed out of office. Nixon expanded the war along with Kissinger into areas they maintained were launching points in other countries for the Viet Cong. (Never proven if my memory serves). And when "he" ended the war, it was not so much an end, but more like a total rout by the communists.

Have we ever really understood what the hell the domino effect was all about? Shit, they are our trading partners now, but no less communist.

Over 50,000 young Americans gave their lives so we could buy cheap plastic flip flops and Goofy dolls. Fucking politicians of both stripes!!!

 

[NineOfClubs]

Nixon expanded the war along with Kissinger into areas they maintained were launching points in other countries for the Viet Cong.

Did you read my link?

Eisenhower had 900 "advisors" in VietNam. It was JFK, and especially LBJ, that expanded the war.

Every year of Nixon's presidency troop levels decreased. Sure, Cambodia was bombed. But, U.S. casualties continued to decrease.

Look at my link, again, and tell me the war was "expanded" after 1969.

 

[unclaimedblessing]

I don't believe all Republicans really want war, just those who stand to make financial gains from doing so.