Poll: John F. Kennedy's plan for getting out of Viêtnam. Could we use it today in Iraq?

[Selatius]

Two of Kennedy's former advisors shed light on what Kennedy would have done if he had lived. They say that, basically, he felt withdrawal was rapidly becoming the most viable option given the deteriorating situation with the South Viêtnamese government. (I recommend all to go to that link to read all it says)

http://www.insearchofkennedy.com/blog/search.lasso?1=entryD&2=71

Eventually he began to understand that withdrawal was the viable option. From the spring of 1963 on, he began to articulate the elements of a three-part exit strategy, one that his assassination would prevent him from pursuing. The three components of Kennedy's exit strategy - well-suited for Iraq after the passage of a new constitution and the coming election - can be summarized as follows:

Make clear that we're going to get out. At a press conference on Nov. 14, 1963, the president did just that, stating, "That is our object, to bring Americans home."

Request an invitation to leave. Arrange for the host government to request the phased withdrawal of all American military personnel - surely not a difficult step in Iraq, especially after the clan statement last month calling for foreign forces to leave. In a May 1963 press conference, Kennedy declared that if the South Vietnamese government suggested it, "we would have some troops on their way home" the next day.

Bring the troops home gradually. Initiate a phased American withdrawal over an unannounced period, beginning immediately, while intensifying the training of local security personnel, bearing in mind that with our increased troop mobility and airlift capacity, American forces are available without being stationed in hazardous areas. In September 1963, Kennedy said of the
South Vietnamese: "In the final analysis, it is their war. They are the ones who have to win it or lose it." A month later, he said, "It would be our hope to lessen the number of Americans" in Vietnam by the end of the year.

...

If we leave Iraq at its own government's request, our withdrawal will be neither abandonment nor retreat. Law-abiding Iraqis may face more clan violence, Balkanization and foreign incursions if we leave; but they may face more clan violence, Balkanization and foreign incursions if we stay. The president has said we will not leave Iraq to the terrorists. Let us leave Iraq to the Iraqis, who have survived centuries of civil war, tyranny and attempted foreign domination.

Could Kennedy's plan serve as an exit strategy for the US in Iraq provided the Iraqi government officially tells the US to get the hell out?

[nebula]

1. JFK is a hero for his efforts to carry out a plan for withdrawal from Vietnam.

And those blood-thirsty war-mongering monsters in Washington killed him for it.

Any plan for a speedy , orderly withdrawal of US forces in Iraq is A-OK in my book. We need one like yesterday.
I find it utterly appalling that so many have been fighting and dying needlessly in Iraq for so long.



btw, how many American ground troops were in Vietnam at the time of Kennedy's assassination?

[Peace Patriot]

4. I don't remember the numbers, but I believe it was still limited to what

were called US military "advisers." It was not a large commitment of forces. That occurred AFTER Kennedy was assassinated--and was more than likely why he was assassinated. Vietnam was barely in most Americans' consciousness when JFK was still alive. Within a year of JFK's death (11/22/63), LBJ had escalated the situation to the point where the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident could be manufactured (US troops and boats patrolling the South/North Vietnamese border areas), to convince Congress to turn it into a full scale war (Oct. '64). I've seen the JFK executive orders starting the withdrawal of the US "advisers" from Vietnam not long before he was killed. (They are on the internet somewhere.)

When you look at his death in that context, and in the context of the NEXT assassinations--anti-Vietnam war candidate RFK heading to the White House, bang, bang, shoot, shoot; and MLK and his magnificent anti-Vietnam War speech at the Riverside Church, going public with his opposition the war at long last, bang, bang, shoot, shoot, three months before RFK was killed--and also when you look at JFK's other major actions--his opposition to the CIA's invasion of Cuba, his defusing the Cuban missile crisis without using nukes, and his stunning speech on nuclear disarmament and world peace at the UN--the conclusion is inescapable that he, and his brother, and also Martin Luther King, were all killed by WAR PROFITEERS, the "military-industrial complex" that Ike warned of just before he left office. Ike's warning is haunting in retrospect:

"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

--------

Ike has a lot to say in this speech, three days before he left office. His description of "communism" is a bit quaint. He never mentions the word; he could be talking about corporations: "a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method." (Sound like Exxon-Mobile?). But it is well worth reading. (He predicts and warns against government sponsored research becoming "a substitute for intellectual curiosity"). It almost makes you weep to read a decent President's words about America's goals--and his hopes for the end of poverty and the success of democracy. But his warning against the "unwarranted influence" of the "military-industrial complex" and "the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power" sends chills down one's spine. It is an extraordinary warning.

That disastrous and misplaced power was about to be exercised three years later by the violent removal of a peace-minded President, and five years after that, of two more peace-minded leaders--for the purpose of slaughtering upwards of 2 million people in Southeast Asia before it was over--why? For the war profiteers and feeding that greatest of pigs, the "military-industrial complex."

And today that disastrous and misplaced power has run rampant in Washington DC.

[Ravy]

2. The current Iraqi government could gain a lot of credibility

simply by asking us to leave.

[Imagevision]

3. JFK's to pull out of Nam contributed to his assination...and that's a fact