I have this theory that our choice of presidencies for the last several years has been overall very predictable by the circumstances at the time. This probably isn't popular with the R's or the D's because it says that the next one will be just as predictable. But let me expound.
My theory starts in the early 1960's. JFK was a young, handsome president, everyone's Prince Charming. A beautiful wife and beautiful children. After his death, Johnson took over as president. When reelection came a year later, America's love for JFK held over to his successor and Johnson was elected in 1964.
In 1968, Johnson refused to run for reelection. America was tired of the war in Vietnam and wanted us out. After RFK's assassination, the Democrats chose Hubert Humphrey to run against Nixon. But again, the demand for change won out. After 8 years of increasing violence in Southeast Asia, riots in the streets and a seeming status-quo, Americans elected a Republican.
Nixon lived up to his promise of getting the US out of Vietnam. But his paranoia led to his downfall. Watergate is the single event most people remember about Nixon. Exactly what he did or what anyone else did seems irrelevant. Americans remember that despite his statements, he was a crook. After his exit from office, Gerald Ford became our first unelected president. Most Americans can't remember anything about him except that he pardoned Nixon. For that and more, he didn't stand a chance for reelection.
In 1976, the Democratic candidate was James Earl Carter. In response to the Nixon presidency, Congress went out of it's way to emasculate the role of the President. The economy was in the dumps and America was too. A small nation that most Americans couldn't find on the map abducted some of our citizens and held them hostage. This became Carter's defining moment. But it lasted longer than a moment and America went further into the dumps.
Tomorrow I'll conclude this story. You know how it turns out, but do you agree with my reasoning?
Showing posts with label Vietnam War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vietnam War. Show all posts
Monday, January 31, 2011
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Is war ever worth fighting
My last post included a video of Joan Baez singing "Where have all the flowers gone?" The song was recorded by just about everyone in the 60's and it seemed to be a statement about the war in Vietnam. I was too young to really understand, but it seemed like a good time to be against something and the Vietnam war was an easy target (war as a target, that's something). Songs like this and "One, two, three, four, what are we fighting for?" (officially "I feel like I'm fixing to die" found here with mild profanity) were about as rebellious as I ever became. By the time I was draft age, the Vietnam War was a memory, a bad memory for a lot of people.
You may have seen that the review of the Afghanistan War is out, to be made official tomorrow. This comes at a time when "a record-high 60 percent of Americans think the war is not worth fighting," according this this article. The war has been raging on for just over 9 years now and an end is far away by anyone's judgment.
It made me think - is war ever worth fighting? Our President has said that this is a war of necessity (one of the few times he has agreed with former President Bush). A year ago he approved a surge, much like the one in Iraq, to send 30,000 more troops in, while also announcing an end date. Many on the left disapproved of this surge, wishing instead to get all troops out.
To me, the answer to the question can be found in a poem put to music by Pete Seeger, the same person who put "Where have all the flowers gone?" to music (the poem is found in the Bible, written by Solomon, the other Seeger song was from an old Ukranian folk song according to Wikipedia, not sure if Seeger actually wrote anything himself). According to the song (and to Solomon), "To every thing there is a season" and more importantly there is "a time of war, and a time of peace." If the Byrds sang it, it has to be so.
The real key is understanding when is the time for war and when is the time for peace. Most Americans would agree that 1776 was a time for war. Through a long fought battle, that wasn't popular with all Americans, we gained our freedom and began a democratic experiment that goes on today. Most people today blame Southerners for the Civil War, and while we did fire the first shot, the war would never have begun if the Union states had left the Confederate states alone. If you believe that the war was over slavery and that slavery needed to be ended (and I do to both), you'll have to say that 1861 was a time for war.
I may not always (often?) agree with this President, but I have to say that I believe he understands this concept. Sometimes, there is a time for war. We may soon find out if this is a time for war in Korea. I hope not. But I hope this President will continue to grow in his understanding of the phrase "a time to every purpose under the heaven:"
You may have seen that the review of the Afghanistan War is out, to be made official tomorrow. This comes at a time when "a record-high 60 percent of Americans think the war is not worth fighting," according this this article. The war has been raging on for just over 9 years now and an end is far away by anyone's judgment.
It made me think - is war ever worth fighting? Our President has said that this is a war of necessity (one of the few times he has agreed with former President Bush). A year ago he approved a surge, much like the one in Iraq, to send 30,000 more troops in, while also announcing an end date. Many on the left disapproved of this surge, wishing instead to get all troops out.
To me, the answer to the question can be found in a poem put to music by Pete Seeger, the same person who put "Where have all the flowers gone?" to music (the poem is found in the Bible, written by Solomon, the other Seeger song was from an old Ukranian folk song according to Wikipedia, not sure if Seeger actually wrote anything himself). According to the song (and to Solomon), "To every thing there is a season" and more importantly there is "a time of war, and a time of peace." If the Byrds sang it, it has to be so.
The real key is understanding when is the time for war and when is the time for peace. Most Americans would agree that 1776 was a time for war. Through a long fought battle, that wasn't popular with all Americans, we gained our freedom and began a democratic experiment that goes on today. Most people today blame Southerners for the Civil War, and while we did fire the first shot, the war would never have begun if the Union states had left the Confederate states alone. If you believe that the war was over slavery and that slavery needed to be ended (and I do to both), you'll have to say that 1861 was a time for war.
I may not always (often?) agree with this President, but I have to say that I believe he understands this concept. Sometimes, there is a time for war. We may soon find out if this is a time for war in Korea. I hope not. But I hope this President will continue to grow in his understanding of the phrase "a time to every purpose under the heaven:"
Saturday, August 01, 2009
Upcountry - Book Review
The other day, I posted a quote about the book Upcountry, by Nelson DeMille. I finished reading the book and thought I'd post a review. I had read other DeMille novels - Plum Island, The Lion's Game and Nightfall, and knew this would be an adventure. The further I got into the new novel, the more adventurous it became.
Upcountry is set mostly in Vietnam. The lead character, Paul Brenner, is a retired Vietnam War veteran who stayed in the Army for several years in the Criminal Investigation Division. After his exit from CID, he is called back for one case - to investigate a 30 year old murder that occurred during the height of the war.
Brenner's travel to Vietnam brings back a lot of memories, some of them quite graphic (not for kids). While I was too young to know details back then, the details provided in this book seem accurate and an epilogue explains DeMille's background and gives authenticity.
Of course there has to be a woman involved, in this case it's Susan Weber. She's been in Vietnam for a number of years and likes the fact that she's living in a new territory, likened to the Old West. Susan decides to accompany Brenner and he's not sure he wants her there.
Typical for DeMille, the novel is action packed. There's some romance in it, and a lot of unanswered questions at the end (but none that affect the quality of the story). The novel is somewhat of a sequel to The General's Daughter (which was made into a John Travolta movie), but I didn't know this until half-way through and I didn't miss anything.
Vietnam War veterans may find this book brings back memories and that could be good or bad. Also, the graphic descriptions could prove too graphic for some people - on at least one occasion I had to take a break from reading to wash my hands. But the story line was excellent and kept you guessing as to what would come next. The ending questions (what happens to Susan Weber?) are not so bothersome as to leave you hanging - I hate it when that happens and often refuse to buy the sequel on purpose alone.
Lately, the idea of race relations has been forefront on my mind, and this book helped understand the issues a little deeper. As noted in my previous post, the regional pride of the North and South Vietnamese, seemed to echo the regional differences in the U.S.
All together, a very good read, I recommend it. I'm interested in your opinion.
Upcountry is set mostly in Vietnam. The lead character, Paul Brenner, is a retired Vietnam War veteran who stayed in the Army for several years in the Criminal Investigation Division. After his exit from CID, he is called back for one case - to investigate a 30 year old murder that occurred during the height of the war.
Brenner's travel to Vietnam brings back a lot of memories, some of them quite graphic (not for kids). While I was too young to know details back then, the details provided in this book seem accurate and an epilogue explains DeMille's background and gives authenticity.
Of course there has to be a woman involved, in this case it's Susan Weber. She's been in Vietnam for a number of years and likes the fact that she's living in a new territory, likened to the Old West. Susan decides to accompany Brenner and he's not sure he wants her there.
Typical for DeMille, the novel is action packed. There's some romance in it, and a lot of unanswered questions at the end (but none that affect the quality of the story). The novel is somewhat of a sequel to The General's Daughter (which was made into a John Travolta movie), but I didn't know this until half-way through and I didn't miss anything.
Vietnam War veterans may find this book brings back memories and that could be good or bad. Also, the graphic descriptions could prove too graphic for some people - on at least one occasion I had to take a break from reading to wash my hands. But the story line was excellent and kept you guessing as to what would come next. The ending questions (what happens to Susan Weber?) are not so bothersome as to leave you hanging - I hate it when that happens and often refuse to buy the sequel on purpose alone.
Lately, the idea of race relations has been forefront on my mind, and this book helped understand the issues a little deeper. As noted in my previous post, the regional pride of the North and South Vietnamese, seemed to echo the regional differences in the U.S.
All together, a very good read, I recommend it. I'm interested in your opinion.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
This animosity between the North and South...
It's unusual for me to comment on a book before I finish reading it, but in this case I just had to do so. I'm reading Nelson DeMille's story about an Vietnam War Veteran who goes back to investigate a murder that took place during the war. I'll do a full review on the story in a few days when I finish the book.
The subject line is part of a quote from the book and it struck me in that it could pertain to the struggle we in the U.S. continue to have with race. I've always thought that if the Civil War and the Reconstruction had taken place differently, race relations would be different. Maybe I take it a little to personally, but I've always felt that we Southerners unfairly get the blame for a lot of racial issues.
The book has nothing to do with race relations (or does it?) but everything to do with war. DeMille has some very colorful descriptions of battles and the characters "detective work." Bottom line, it's not a story for children.
The entire quote: "This animosity between the North and South Viets, the victor and the vanquished, went on, and it was a very complex thing, having less to do with the war, I thought, than what came after. War is simple; peace is complex."
What do you think? Does this apply to the Yankees and the Rebels?
The subject line is part of a quote from the book and it struck me in that it could pertain to the struggle we in the U.S. continue to have with race. I've always thought that if the Civil War and the Reconstruction had taken place differently, race relations would be different. Maybe I take it a little to personally, but I've always felt that we Southerners unfairly get the blame for a lot of racial issues.
The book has nothing to do with race relations (or does it?) but everything to do with war. DeMille has some very colorful descriptions of battles and the characters "detective work." Bottom line, it's not a story for children.
The entire quote: "This animosity between the North and South Viets, the victor and the vanquished, went on, and it was a very complex thing, having less to do with the war, I thought, than what came after. War is simple; peace is complex."
What do you think? Does this apply to the Yankees and the Rebels?
Sunday, October 12, 2008
The Fog of War - Movie Review
Somehow, this percolated to the top of my Netflix queue. I watched it by myself, I knew my wife wouldn't enjoy it. It's the story of Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense under JFK and LBJ - during the escalation in Vietnam. This documentary serves as his biography. The subtitle was "eleven life lessons from the life of Robert S. McNamara", it highlights these points for the viewer (I won't post them here).
The movie was slow, as most documentaries are. It's told from McNamara's point of view with him speaking most of the parts. The interviewer seems to be from NPR. In my opinion, the interviewer seems to be trying to pick a fight.
The first 42 minutes of the film discuss McNamara's involvement in WW II. The most significant quote in this part (thanks to IMDB) McNamara's superior Colonel "LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. " This was in relationship to fire bombing Tokyo and killing 100,00 civilian lives in a single night. So the difference between a hero and a war criminal is who wins the war.
It's clear that McNamara has some bad memories from WW II. Yes, the tactics he recommended saved thousands of American soldiers. But it seems to me that he is haunted by some of the trade-offs.
After WW II, McNamara became one of the "whiz kids" who brought life back to Ford Motor Company. So much life, he eventually became president of Ford. He was the first non-family member to be president. McNamara introduced the Ford Falcon, which became extremely popular. But his stay as president was short, he soon accepted JFK's request to serve in government. This resulted in a MAJOR reduction in pay.
McNamara was secretary of defense during the Cuban missile crisis. He believes that the USA came with "a hair's breadth of war with the Soviet Union on three different occasions." War that would have likely resulted in nuclear weapons. "They'll be no learning period with nuclear weapons. Make one mistake and you're going to destroy nations." McNamara has spoken out against nuclear weapons on many occasions after his service.
Most of the movie focused on the Vietnam War. It may be that he was trying to explain the reasons for the war. In some ways, he was just serving the president. In other ways, he was trying to convince the president what should be done, what he felt was right. But to many Americans, he was a part of the problem. He was a part of the cover-up, explaining how good things were, while knowing how bad they were. During his services, a man named Norman Morrison came to the Pentagon and, while standing beneath McNamara's office, doused himself with kerosene and lit himself on fire. Initially, he was holding his one year old daughter, but bystanders encouraged him to throw the child out, saving her life.
What kind of impact would that have on your life? Knowing that this man opposed your actions so much, he would kill himself and nearly kill his daughter? Knowing that your suggestion to fire-bomb Tokyo cost the lives of many civilians? Knowing that you helped continue the war in Vietnam, the most unpopular war in American history?
Not knowing any details about McNamara, I found the movie interesting. I'm sure there is another side to the story. It seems to me that McNamara is trying to make things right. He's trying to explain how he got where he was, and not all of it was good. But one thing that struck me was that he was serving his country. Something that is amiss in many people today.
The movie was slow, as most documentaries are. It's told from McNamara's point of view with him speaking most of the parts. The interviewer seems to be from NPR. In my opinion, the interviewer seems to be trying to pick a fight.
The first 42 minutes of the film discuss McNamara's involvement in WW II. The most significant quote in this part (thanks to IMDB) McNamara's superior Colonel "LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. " This was in relationship to fire bombing Tokyo and killing 100,00 civilian lives in a single night. So the difference between a hero and a war criminal is who wins the war.
It's clear that McNamara has some bad memories from WW II. Yes, the tactics he recommended saved thousands of American soldiers. But it seems to me that he is haunted by some of the trade-offs.
After WW II, McNamara became one of the "whiz kids" who brought life back to Ford Motor Company. So much life, he eventually became president of Ford. He was the first non-family member to be president. McNamara introduced the Ford Falcon, which became extremely popular. But his stay as president was short, he soon accepted JFK's request to serve in government. This resulted in a MAJOR reduction in pay.
McNamara was secretary of defense during the Cuban missile crisis. He believes that the USA came with "a hair's breadth of war with the Soviet Union on three different occasions." War that would have likely resulted in nuclear weapons. "They'll be no learning period with nuclear weapons. Make one mistake and you're going to destroy nations." McNamara has spoken out against nuclear weapons on many occasions after his service.
Most of the movie focused on the Vietnam War. It may be that he was trying to explain the reasons for the war. In some ways, he was just serving the president. In other ways, he was trying to convince the president what should be done, what he felt was right. But to many Americans, he was a part of the problem. He was a part of the cover-up, explaining how good things were, while knowing how bad they were. During his services, a man named Norman Morrison came to the Pentagon and, while standing beneath McNamara's office, doused himself with kerosene and lit himself on fire. Initially, he was holding his one year old daughter, but bystanders encouraged him to throw the child out, saving her life.
What kind of impact would that have on your life? Knowing that this man opposed your actions so much, he would kill himself and nearly kill his daughter? Knowing that your suggestion to fire-bomb Tokyo cost the lives of many civilians? Knowing that you helped continue the war in Vietnam, the most unpopular war in American history?
Not knowing any details about McNamara, I found the movie interesting. I'm sure there is another side to the story. It seems to me that McNamara is trying to make things right. He's trying to explain how he got where he was, and not all of it was good. But one thing that struck me was that he was serving his country. Something that is amiss in many people today.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Washongton Vacation - part 2
Today we toured the monuments and memorials. We slept a little later, but then we have no schedule so that was ok. The temperature was down at least 10 degrees from yesterday and lower humidity. It was pleasant this morning, livable this afternoon.
The Washington Monument was neat. A word to any prospective visitors, either plan your trip or be prepared NOT to go into the cool places. By the time we arrived, all tickets for the monument for the day were gone. You can order tickets (they are free) online or by phone, but you have to order a month in advance. No problems, I laid on the pavement beside it and took pictures (will upload on another day).
One man asked my wife if she could take a picture of him and someone with him (father? brother? friend? it didn't matter). She gladly did so, then when she was finished, I offered to take a picture of the three of them together. It took him a minute to realize I was joking. He took a picture of the two of us with the Lincoln Memorial in the background.
We also did the memorials. While at the WWII memorial, we actually saw Bob Dole. We have lots of pictures. What was most striking at the WWII memorial was the number of WWII veterans accompanied by their children, about my age. I spoke to one vet who served in the Army, 1942-1946. His job was loading the ships. I asked him if he had been in Seattle and he said yes. I told him my dad was there in late 1945 (post VJ day) and planted grass. Dad always said he had to cut that same grass when he came back through after his tour. The man laughed.
We then went to the Vietnam Memorial. I know one family that lost a son there. When I was about 10, he died. I remember the man crying at church. It always struck me. We found his name and took some pictures. I tried to help one lady get a "rubbing" off the wall. It was very high and even I couldn't reach it. Her husband and I offered for her to stand on our legs, we crooked our knees to give her a platform. Unfortunately, we weren't stable enough. Later we saw her with a park ranger and a ladder.
Next was the Lincoln Memorial. Then the Korean War memorial. Then we took a long walk the the FDR memorial. I remember one of the quotes on the wall talked about what he thought about war. It ended with "I hate war". After seeing all the memorials today and then seeing this quote, it really struck me. Of course, even though he hated war, FDR was the one who led us into WWII. Enough said about that. I want to remember the memorials and remember that quote. More on another day.
Finally, we went to the Jefferson Memorial. On the way back to the Metro station a lady coming out of the Dept of Treasury stopped us from going up the wrong way. We asked her the quickest way and after a momentary hesitation, she said we could just follow her. Once she headed to her car (or wherever) she gave us excellent directions to the station. I don't know what her job was, but she was very nice.
Strangest thing for today: The waitress at dinner. She had tattoos all over her forearms and had a pierced tongue, a pierced eyebrow, and a pierced lip/chin (looked painful). She also had a pen in her hair, I don't think it went through any skin (I hope not). She was a good waitress.
The Washington Monument was neat. A word to any prospective visitors, either plan your trip or be prepared NOT to go into the cool places. By the time we arrived, all tickets for the monument for the day were gone. You can order tickets (they are free) online or by phone, but you have to order a month in advance. No problems, I laid on the pavement beside it and took pictures (will upload on another day).
One man asked my wife if she could take a picture of him and someone with him (father? brother? friend? it didn't matter). She gladly did so, then when she was finished, I offered to take a picture of the three of them together. It took him a minute to realize I was joking. He took a picture of the two of us with the Lincoln Memorial in the background.
We also did the memorials. While at the WWII memorial, we actually saw Bob Dole. We have lots of pictures. What was most striking at the WWII memorial was the number of WWII veterans accompanied by their children, about my age. I spoke to one vet who served in the Army, 1942-1946. His job was loading the ships. I asked him if he had been in Seattle and he said yes. I told him my dad was there in late 1945 (post VJ day) and planted grass. Dad always said he had to cut that same grass when he came back through after his tour. The man laughed.
We then went to the Vietnam Memorial. I know one family that lost a son there. When I was about 10, he died. I remember the man crying at church. It always struck me. We found his name and took some pictures. I tried to help one lady get a "rubbing" off the wall. It was very high and even I couldn't reach it. Her husband and I offered for her to stand on our legs, we crooked our knees to give her a platform. Unfortunately, we weren't stable enough. Later we saw her with a park ranger and a ladder.
Next was the Lincoln Memorial. Then the Korean War memorial. Then we took a long walk the the FDR memorial. I remember one of the quotes on the wall talked about what he thought about war. It ended with "I hate war". After seeing all the memorials today and then seeing this quote, it really struck me. Of course, even though he hated war, FDR was the one who led us into WWII. Enough said about that. I want to remember the memorials and remember that quote. More on another day.
Finally, we went to the Jefferson Memorial. On the way back to the Metro station a lady coming out of the Dept of Treasury stopped us from going up the wrong way. We asked her the quickest way and after a momentary hesitation, she said we could just follow her. Once she headed to her car (or wherever) she gave us excellent directions to the station. I don't know what her job was, but she was very nice.
Strangest thing for today: The waitress at dinner. She had tattoos all over her forearms and had a pierced tongue, a pierced eyebrow, and a pierced lip/chin (looked painful). She also had a pen in her hair, I don't think it went through any skin (I hope not). She was a good waitress.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Memorial day
Is it the beginning of summer? Or just a time for cook-outs? I went to wikipedia for some information on Memorial Day. While it may not always be the best source, it proved a good resource in this case.
Memorial Day "commemorates U.S. men and women who perished while in military service to their country."
Today my family will celebrate by going to a state park and cooking some hamburgers and hot dogs. Then, we'll possibly take a stroll along some of the paths. Down by the lake or up by the dam.
But we'll also stop to remember some of the folks who made this possible. Some people who fought to make us a country, not a territory. Some people who kept the "united" in United States. Some people who went "over there". Some people who fought an agressive man, and kept him from taking over the world. Some people who never understood why, they just did what their country asked. And some who understood and tried to make it safe for you and me.
Memorial Day "commemorates U.S. men and women who perished while in military service to their country."
Today my family will celebrate by going to a state park and cooking some hamburgers and hot dogs. Then, we'll possibly take a stroll along some of the paths. Down by the lake or up by the dam.
But we'll also stop to remember some of the folks who made this possible. Some people who fought to make us a country, not a territory. Some people who kept the "united" in United States. Some people who went "over there". Some people who fought an agressive man, and kept him from taking over the world. Some people who never understood why, they just did what their country asked. And some who understood and tried to make it safe for you and me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)