It was Congress’s interference in the war that allowed the North to invade, not any decision by the President. It was not President Nixon that fail South Vietnam, it was Congress.

RedinBlueCounty on February 13, 2007 at 2:14 PM

I repeat, the Congress acted AFTER the Paris Peace agreement was signed. Meaning after the war was declared over. Does Congress bear responsibility? Sure, but let’s try to tell the whole story–Nixon ran for office in 68 promising to end the war.

Allahpundit @ HotAir and Ed Morrissey @ Captain’s Quarters think that Zawahiri’s pledge of allegiance to Mullah Omar in the latest video might be a sign that al-Qaeda No. 1 might not be alive…….

The dems strategy is to trot out all their military veterans to endorse this resolution. They’re saying this is all Iraq’s problem and that we shouldn’t be helping them.

The dems absolutely refuse to see that if we ‘re-deploy’ we’re just going to have to go back in, and that it will be vastly more difficult, as we will have to re-take areas we now control. Not to mention that we will not have the good will and cooperation from the Iraqi Army forces, seeing as how we will have abandoned them.

It is a foolish and dangerous thing to even contemplate. Where is the spine of the Democratic Party? Where is the logic and good sense? What they’re proposing is, quite literally, insanity.

The dems are actually saying that the conflict in Iraq has no connection whatsoever to the global war on terror.

That doesn’t surprise me as most democrats believe that terrorism is “just a nuisance” and not an actual threat to America and our allies around the world.

The Pubs are listing out accurate and specific information and the dems are, literally, whining and eager to embrace defeat.

The dems are actually saying that the conflict in Iraq has no connection whatsoever to the global war on terror.

Criminal negligence and exceedingly dangerous to American Interests worldwide. No other way to put it.

They should vote on this ridiculous resolution and be put on record as the cowards and traitors they are.

You’re right when you say that some Republican’s backed this amendment, just as calls for the current non binding resolution also has Republican backers. That doesn’t mean that the Democrats were not involved as they were in the Majority and this amendment could not have passed without their overwhelming approval.

But you miss the most important aspect. Congress decided that the President should not be allowed to be the Commander In Chief concerning the Vietnam war and passed an amendment that directly affected the President’s ability to command that war and that interference allowed the South to be invaded. That congressional action lead to the death of millions.

The President had, at that time, forced the North to sign a cease fire WHILE reducing the number of American troops involved in that war. He started a bombing campaign that forced the North to this agreement. That was a remarkable achievement, in my opinion.

Only after Congress refused to allow any further military action in SE Asia did the north build up their forces to the point that they could invade the South. They knew that America could not intervene on the behalf of the South. This is why the Vietnam war was considered a failure.

It was Congress’s interference in the war that allowed the North to invade, not any decision by the President. It was not President Nixon that fail South Vietnam, it was Congress.

I do believe that the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate in those days.

RedinBlueCounty on February 13, 2007 at 1:26 PM

Yes, but the vote was overwhelming, veto-proof–Case of course was a Republican. And the amendment was 6 months after the Paris Peace Accords were signed. The amendment was designed to stop the exec from more entanglements in SE Asia minus Congressional approval.

Nixon’s slogan in 1968″ “Peace with Honor”.

The Case-Church Amendment was a piece of legislation that sought to rein in President Richard Nixon’s conduct of the Vietnam War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case-Church_amendment

Does this sound familiar to anyone? I wonder how long it will take to go from a “non-binding resolution” on the Iraq War to an amendment forbidding military action in the Middle East?

“War Powers”, “aid cut” “South Vietnam” “North Vietnam tanks” “Democrats in Congress” try some of those terms out…

June 19, 1973 – The U.S. Congress passes the Case-Church Amendment which forbids any further U.S. military involvement in Southeast Asia, effective August 15, 1973. The veto-proof vote is 278-124 in the House and 64-26 in the Senate.

The Amendment paves the way for North Vietnam to wage yet another invasion of the South, this time without fear of U.S. bombing.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index-1969.html

I do believe that the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate in those days.

…and funny how people intentionally forget who was president when the Vietnam war started…
Hmmm, I wonder what that drunken fool, Teddy, was saying then.

Rick on February 13, 2007 at 12:23 PM

I dunno. But I do believe that the very first advisors were sent by Ike, not JFK as some state. Either way it was Johnson who escalated. He also had a cadre of fools around him–remember Westmoreland? Hell he looked like he came straight from Central Casting, too late we all discovered it was liar, liar pants on fire.

…and funny how people intentionally forget who was president when the Vietnam war started…

Hmmm, I wonder what that drunken fool, Teddy, was saying then.

It does serve as good reminder to those who constantly whine about how put upon our CIC is–nothing new here folks. Can’t stand the heat etc.

honora on February 13, 2007 at 8:49 AM

Ronald Reagan comes to mind – harp, harp, harp – then, hero, hero, hero…not that many years later. Miraculously history changes quickly, often.

Funny how people forget who was president when we gave up the ghost in Vietnam. Well maybe more convenient than funny.

honora on February 13, 2007 at 11:47 AM

…and funny how people intentionally forget who was president when the Vietnam war started…

Just a little tempering, over tea/coffee this morning, because all of us, presidents included, don’t have crystal balls to function by, and gypsies’ cards are not reliable.

Sounds like someone woke up on the wrong side of the rock this morning… The latest taped statement from al Qaeda is an unusually personal attack on President Bush, in which al Qaeda’s No. 2 in command, Ayman al Zawahiri,……

There you have it honora.

Verbal Abuse on February 13, 2007 at 9:43 AM

You mean the Vietnam reference? It seems to me he is making reference to “America” meaning the people–he clearly lumps the Dems in with Bush et al in the first paragraph.

Funny how people forget who was president when we gave up the ghost in Vietnam. Well maybe more convenient than funny.

“The people chose you due to your opposition to Bush’s policy in Iraq, but it appears that you are marching with him to the same abyss, and it appears that you will take part with him in the defeat and certain failure, with God’s permission,” he said.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves Z-Man. The Dems in the House are debating Iraq policy this week and I’m sure they will give you some cause to celebrate. You just keep that TV in your cave tuned in to CSPAN this week and I’m sure you won’t be disappointed.

As for the Democrats in America, I tell them:

The people chose you due to your opposition to Bush’s policy in Iraq, but it appears that you are marching with him to the same abyss, and it appears that you will take part with him in the defeat and certain failure, with God’s permission. And the American people shall discover that you are all one side of the same coin of tyranny, criminality and failure; that failure which – by the grace of God – has neutralized the endeavors of the traitors who entered Kabul and Baghdad on the backs of American tanks, and has dashed their hopes as they see the Mujahideen come closer and closer to victory, which has led them to urgently appeal to America for help and implore it to continue to occupy their lands and raise the banners of the Cross over their heads.

These traitors in Iraq and Afghanistan must face their inevitable fate, and face up to the inescapable facts. America – which was transformed from the “Great Satan” into the “Closest Ally” – is about to depart and abandon them, just as it abandoned their like in Vietnam.

There you have it honora.

He is more or less admitting that he is depending on the Dems to retreat and surrender Iraq to them.

Verbal Abuse on February 13, 2007 at 8:57 AM

Where does he say this?

Zawahiri is delinquint in his oft-espoused duty to martyr himself for Allah. What’s the holdup there, fella?

shaken on February 13, 2007 at 8:56 AM

Busy, busy, busy…LOL