The recent writing

Comments

Sign in or register to comment.

• Previous
• Next

• 1. At 05:39am on 20 Jul 2009, Dennis Junior wrote:

  Thanks, Eddie for the attention in the form of writing regarding the dearly departed Walter Cronkite...
  
  ~Dennis Junior~

  Complain about this comment

• 2. At 10:42am on 20 Jul 2009, U14056677 wrote:

  Are we celebrating the words of the right fellas here?
  
  
  Quote:
  
  I think that people want peace so much that one of these days government had better get out of their way and let them have it.
  
  
  In most communities it is illegal to cry "fire" in a crowded assembly. Should it not be considered serious international misconduct to manufacture a general war scare in an effort to achieve local political aims?
  
  
  
  In the final choice a soldier's pack is not so heavy as a prisoner's chains.
  
  
  
  May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion
  
  
  
  Unquote
  
  
  'Course 3 and 4 cut both ways.
  
  But this doesn't:
  
  
  "How can we expect 'free elections' to be held in the Communist North?" Diem asked. President Dwight D. Eisenhower echoed senior U.S. experts when he wrote that, in 1954, "80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh" over Emperor Bao Dai.
  
  Diem had refused them in the South.
  
  
  That's Eisenhower.
  
  This is Cronkite, sounding so apposite:
  
  
  To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past. To suggest we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. On the off chance that military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy's intentions, in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations.
  
  
  But he ends:
  
  But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.
  
  
  The US fights for democracy? Tell that to the marines whilst you remember
  coups against duly elected governments in Iran (1953); Guatemala (1954, 1963 and 1968); Congo (1960); Dominican Republic (1965); Indonesia (1965); Ghana (1966); Chile (1973); Granada (1983); and in Haiti (2004) and Amercian involvment in crushing national liberation struggles and progressive movements in Greece (1947-49), Palestine (1948-2009), Philippines (1948-54), Puerto Rico (1950), Korea (1950-53), Egypt (1956 and 1967), Lebanon (1958, 1982 and 2006), Vietnam (1960-75), Cuba (1961), Cambodia (1969-75), Laos (1971-73), Angola (1976-92), Afghanistan (1978-1990-2009), Nicaragua (1981-90), Venezuela (2004).
  
  
  
  

  Complain about this comment

• 3. At 12:39pm on 20 Jul 2009, Chris_Ghoti wrote:

  ThinkerRetired @ 2, that list of conflicts in which America has been involved: would you say that America could be said to have "won" any of them, ie achieved its stated aims in being involved? How many of the places named are now both democratic and allied with America?
  
  Come to think of it, apart from having changed the regime in Iraq when *did* America last win a war, on that basis?

  Complain about this comment

• 4. At 01:44am on 21 Jul 2009, U14056677 wrote:

  No
  
  Unless its aim was the destruction of viable and corrigible political sand economic entities which saw through America.

  Complain about this comment

• Previous
• Next

View these comments in RSS