Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: ''There are only two things we should fight for.'' -- Maj. Gen. Smedley Darlington Butler [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)31. JFK ordered withdrawal from Vietnam. LBJ reversed it four days after Dallas.
In National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) 263 JFK orders everybody out...

Then in NSAM 273...

Vietnam Withdrawal Plans
The 1990s saw the gaps in the declassified record on Vietnam filled inwith spring 1963 plans for the complete withdrawal of U.S. forces. An initial 1000 man pullout (of the approximately 17,000 stationed in Vietnam at that time) was initiated in October 1963, though it was diluted and rendered meaningless in the aftermath of Kennedy's death. The longer-range plans called for complete withdrawal of U. S. forces and a "Vietnamization" of the war, scheduled to happen largely after the 1964 elections.
The debate over whether withdrawal plans were underway in 1963 is now settled. What remains contentious is the "what if" scenario. What would Kennedy have done if he lived, given the worsening situation in Vietnam after the coup which resulted in the assassination of Vietnamese President Diem?
At the core of the debate is this question: Did President Kennedy really believe the rosy picture of the war effort being conveyed by his military advisors. Or was he onto the game, and instead couching his withdrawal plans in the language of optimism being fed to the White House?
The landmark book JFK and Vietnam asserted the latter, that Kennedy knew he was being deceived and played a deception game of his own, using the military's own rosy analysis as a justification for withdrawal. Newman's analysis, with its dark implications regarding JFK's murder, has been attacked from both mainstream sources and even those on the left. No less than Noam Chomsky devoted an entire book to disputing the thesis.
But declassifications since Newman's 1992 book have only served to buttress the thesis that the Vietnam withdrawal, kept under wraps to avoid a pre-election attack from the right, was Kennedy's plan regardless of the war's success. New releases have also brought into focus the chilling visions of the militarists of that erafour Presidents were advised to use nuclear weapons in Indochina. A recent book by David Kaiser, American Tragedy, shows a military hell bent on war in Asia.
CONTINUED with very important IMFO links:
http://www.history-matters.com/vietnam1963.htm
Then in NSAM 273...

Vietnam Withdrawal Plans
The 1990s saw the gaps in the declassified record on Vietnam filled inwith spring 1963 plans for the complete withdrawal of U.S. forces. An initial 1000 man pullout (of the approximately 17,000 stationed in Vietnam at that time) was initiated in October 1963, though it was diluted and rendered meaningless in the aftermath of Kennedy's death. The longer-range plans called for complete withdrawal of U. S. forces and a "Vietnamization" of the war, scheduled to happen largely after the 1964 elections.
The debate over whether withdrawal plans were underway in 1963 is now settled. What remains contentious is the "what if" scenario. What would Kennedy have done if he lived, given the worsening situation in Vietnam after the coup which resulted in the assassination of Vietnamese President Diem?
At the core of the debate is this question: Did President Kennedy really believe the rosy picture of the war effort being conveyed by his military advisors. Or was he onto the game, and instead couching his withdrawal plans in the language of optimism being fed to the White House?
The landmark book JFK and Vietnam asserted the latter, that Kennedy knew he was being deceived and played a deception game of his own, using the military's own rosy analysis as a justification for withdrawal. Newman's analysis, with its dark implications regarding JFK's murder, has been attacked from both mainstream sources and even those on the left. No less than Noam Chomsky devoted an entire book to disputing the thesis.
But declassifications since Newman's 1992 book have only served to buttress the thesis that the Vietnam withdrawal, kept under wraps to avoid a pre-election attack from the right, was Kennedy's plan regardless of the war's success. New releases have also brought into focus the chilling visions of the militarists of that erafour Presidents were advised to use nuclear weapons in Indochina. A recent book by David Kaiser, American Tragedy, shows a military hell bent on war in Asia.
CONTINUED with very important IMFO links:
http://www.history-matters.com/vietnam1963.htm
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
108 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
''There are only two things we should fight for.'' -- Maj. Gen. Smedley Darlington Butler [View all]
Octafish
May 2015
OP
If only our citizens had the same idea of what it means to be an American.
raouldukelives
May 2015
#30
She seems to have made a remarkable U-turn in her approach to diplomacy: now it's pure PNAC.
Octafish
May 2015
#29
Roger That - Many Citizens See HRC For What She Is - A Patron Of The Oligarchs
cantbeserious
May 2015
#44
War profiteering: The BIG Conspiracy of the 1%. (They sell the tin-foil hats, too.)
WinkyDink
May 2015
#11
Dubya always spoke his truth. Many simply chose to read him differently. Fool me....won't get fooled
WinkyDink
May 2015
#108
I totally agree with you. There is no question IMO as to the intentions of the
rhett o rick
May 2015
#82
I am disappointed that you got to a point where you thought it was necessary to
rhett o rick
May 2015
#84
"wars where started by people who thought they were defending..." BWAHAHAHAHA! They "thought" no
WinkyDink
May 2015
#59
I never state what their motivations were only what they have said they were...
Cryptoad
May 2015
#105
when Butler said Bill of Rights, he probably meant protecting it from internal threats
yurbud
May 2015
#23
in context, my interpretation is far more likely than one corporatists could use
yurbud
May 2015
#83
the most important post of the day. Every politician should be asked if they read this and forced
yurbud
May 2015
#20
That's a philosophy that sometimes leads to vast numbers of innocent people dying horribly and
Donald Ian Rankin
May 2015
#78
And somehow, Dubya knew FL was safe, even though his whereabouts had been published.
WinkyDink
May 2015
#62
Right Wingers think a country shows it's Power and Glory on the battlefield....
Spitfire of ATJ
May 2015
#58
There was a plot to overthrow FDR during the early years of his administration,
red dog 1
May 2015
#79