Vietnam

Presidents And Difficult Diplomacy: TR, FDR, Truman, JFK, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Obama

Presidents have to deal with recalcitrant nations in diplomacy, including nations that are our adversaries.

The key is to promote agreements, with the ability to verify and hold nations accountable, under international agreement. It is not an issue of trust, as many nations see other nations as rivals, but rather the ability to come to agreements with the understanding that violations can lead to a confrontational situation if they are not kept.

Presidents have regularly taken bold steps in diplomacy with other nations, whereby they suffered from strong criticism as being naive and weak, but history tells us they actually demonstrated courage and principle, that international agreements could be upheld if both sides wish to avoid military confrontation.

So we have President Theodore Roosevelt negotiating agreements with a newly ambitious Japan after the Russo-Japanese War.

So we have President Franklin D. Roosevelt deciding to establish diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union after 16 years of non recognition.

So we have President Harry Truman deciding to recognize Israel, and in so doing, alienating Arab nations in the Middle East.

So we have President John F. Kennedy agreeing to the Nuclear Best Ban Treaty in 1963 with the Soviet Union, and it is still in effect today. This came after the Cuban Missile Crisis, which many believed the result would not be obeyed by the Soviet Union, but they did precisely what was required under the settlement.

So we have President Richard Nixon, who made arms limitation agreements (SALT I) with the Soviet Union, and opened the door to contacts with the People’s Republic of China, both moves that are now hailed, although criticized at the time.

SO we have President Jimmy Carter accomplishing something no one would have believed, an agreement between Israel and Egypt, and mutual recognition, in what became known as the Camp David Accords. Additionally, Carter decided to recognize the Communist government in China as being China, rather than Taiwan.

So we have President Ronald Reagan, after calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire”, negotiate arms agreements with Mikhail Gorbachev.

So we have President Bill Clinton bringing about peace between the Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, an event that seemed impossible of achievement, known as the Good Friday Agreements of 1998. He also established diplomatic relations with Vietnam, a generation after the end of the divisive war in Vietnam was lost.

So now we have President Barack Obama negotiating an agreement to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons, with five other nations engaged in the process, and to prevent war, while guaranteeing the security of Israel and Arab nations. Like all the others, it is a gamble, as no one can be sure of Iran’s ultimate actions, but it has worked out in all of the other cases. He also has established diplomatic relations with the government of Fidel and Raul Castro in Cuba.

And yet, nothing is a panacea, as Russia and China still present a challenge, but progress was made to avoid war, and that is happening again now, with the understanding that if the agreement is broken, war is always an ultimate alternative!

Presidents And Dictatorships: Double Standard Of Critics Of Obama Change Of Cuban Policy

Presidents of the United States deal with reality, not what they might wish was so.

America has had diplomatic relations with all sorts of terrible people who govern the world’s nations over time.

Latin American dictatorships, including those of Fulgencio Batista in Cuba; Rafael Trujillo in the Dominican Republic; the Duvalier dynasty, father and son, in Haiti; Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua; and military dictatorships in all of the South American nations at different times, have been accepted by American Presidents.

Our Presidents have dealt with Asian dictatorships, including China beginning with Richard Nixon; and with Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Vietnam, South Korea for decades, Laos, Cambodia, Afghanistan and the former Soviet Republics, now independent, but almost all of them dictatorships.

We have dealt with the Arab nations of the Middle East and with Iran under the Shah, despite their harsh dictatorships.

We have had dealings with African dictatorships of all stripes, including South Africa under Apartheid; and the brutal governments of much of the continent.

Somehow, Cuba has been seen differently, when the governments of many of the world’s nations has been far worse in their oppression than Fidel and Raul Castro.

This is not saying that Fidel and Raul Castro cannot, rightfully, be condemned for their human rights violations, but if human rights was the guide, we would not have any diplomatic relations or trade with 80 percent of the world!

When Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and the two Presidents Bush have embraced, and even endorsed, dictators, it was always seen as no big deal, but when Barack Obama opens up to Cuba after 54 years, it is perceived as a crime of massive proportions, while we willingly accepted the previous harsh dictatorship in Cuba of Batista and his henchmen!

Hypocrisy anyone?

Obama Supported By Chambers Of Commerce, Catholic Church, Public Opinion Polls, And Many Others, On Cuban Policy

President Obama has taken a gigantic step in changing Cuban policy, and his initiative will overcome the opposition of Cuban American Senators Marco Rubio of Florida, Ted Cruz of Texas, and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, along with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and many other Republicans and some Democrats, other than Menendez.

This Cuban initiative was promoted by Canada’s Conservative government; Pope Francis; Republican Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona; and many other rational people who knew that the policy against Fidel and Raul Castro, beginning under Dwight D. Eisenhower, and lasting through what is now eleven Presidencies, was having no real effect on the Cuban government, and harming its citizens. The Chambers of Commerce and the Catholic Church in America have also endorsed the change in policy. And, interestingly, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has also backed the Obama policy as rational and reasonable, which it most certainly is! And public opinion polls show about 60 percent support a change in Cuban policy.

Yes, the Castros have been horrific on human rights, but we have have relations with many oppressive governments, which are more than half the nations in the world. These have included Communist governments, as in China and Vietnam, for instance; but also numerous right wing dictatorships in Latin America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East over the decades.

If we can deal with Vietnam, where 58,000 Americans died, then we can deal with Cuba a half century after the Cuban Missile Crisis!

Either we accept that fact, that it is time to change a Cuban policy which has never worked, or we need to cut off relations with most of the nations in the world, and live in isolation, and our own “dream world” of reality!

Historic Action Of Barack Obama On Changing Isolation Policy Toward Cuba!

When history is recorded on the Obama Presidency, the President’s move to end the isolation of Cuba, a failed policy for 54 years, will be high on the list of accomplishments!

The decision under Dwight D. Eisenhower to start an embargo on Cuba on January 17, 1961, was an historic mistake that has failed to bring down the regime of Fidel and Raul Castro.

Who would have thought that, through thick and thin, and even without Soviet support for the past 20 years, that the Castro brothers would have the continuation of the longest personal dictatorship in modern times, surviving through eleven Presidencies?

It is not an issue of endorsing the harsh dictatorship of Fidel and Raul Castro, as that, rightfully, has been, and continues to be, something worth condemning.

But if we were to decide not to deal with governments that are oppressive, then we would not have diplomatic relations with much of the world, and certainly not with China and Vietnam, but Richard Nixon opened up to China; Jimmy Carter established diplomatic ties to China; and Bill Clinton established diplomatic ties with Vietnam, a scant generation after 58,000 Americans died in the disastrous Vietnam War!

The Castro Brothers, in their mid to high 80s are on the way out, and Raul has said he will retire in 2018, and there is no obvious family heir, so the opportunity to influence the future of the island is likely by America having diplomatic relations with Cuba, and promoting trade, travel and opening up to American influence.

The Congress should lift the embargo, but even if they do not, short term, the failed policy is on its way out, and a majority of Americans support opening up to Cuba.

Barack Obama has been a profile in courage on this, and Senators Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Robert Menendez, and House members Ileana Ros Lehtinen, and Mario Diaz Balart, and other Cuban American politicians are living in the past, with their narrow minded views on their homeland to go into the dustbin of history! The older generation in Florida and elsewhere may still be bitterly opposed to change, but the younger generation supports opening up to Cuba, which will have a massive short range and long range effect on that nation!

Robert Gates’ Criticism Of Joe Biden On Distrusting Military Is A Plus!

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made news with his memoir, in which he makes some strong criticism of President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

And yet, he is positive overall on Obama, and thinks both Biden and Clinton would probably make good Presidents.

Most interesting is his criticism of Biden, that he has been critical of military leadership, and that he has, according to Gates, never been right in the past 40 years on any national security matter. And yet he would make a good President, so figure that!

To say that Biden has been wrong for the past 40 years makes us think that, supposedly, every President since Nixon has been right on national security and defense matters. And to say that Biden has NEVER been right is totally preposterous! And what is the record on Presidents since JFK?

Was Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and particularly Bush II, REALLY right all of the time? Give me a break!

When one thinks back, the military leadership misled John F. Kennedy on the Bay of Pigs.

The military leadership misled Lyndon B. Johnson on Vietnam.

The military leadership was wrong on Vietnam under Nixon, as well.

In the brief tenure of Gerald Ford, thank goodness no major flub by the military leadership.

The military leadership misled Jimmy Carter on the Iranian hostage military rescue attempt.

The military leadership misled Ronald Reagan on dealing with “freedom fighters” in Afghanistan, and in dealing with Iraq’s leader Saddam Hussein.

The military leadership misled George H. W. Bush on Somalian intervention.

The military leadership misled Bill Clinton on dealing with Al Qaeda.

The military leadership misled George W. Bush on Afghanistan and Iraq.

So if Barack Obama was skeptical and IS skeptical about the military leadership in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, that was good!

And if Joe Biden had, and has, a healthy dose of skepticism about the military leadership, that is VERY GOOD!

And that means Joe Biden would be an excellent successor to Barack Obama, because he questions, has doubts, does not worship the military leadership!

That is the kind of President we have now, and need, in the future!

Thank goodness for who we have in our top two positions in our national government, men with a dose of skepticism, with the reminder that we have a civilian government, not one run by the military, and that is what has kept us free, and will continue to do so!

Actor And Director Clint Eastwood: Not Really A Republican In 2012

Actor and director Clint Eastwood made a fool of himself last night with his rambling, weird speech at the Republican National Convention, and it was plain strange that he even was speaking at the convention

Eastwood has voted for Democrats before, and while calling himself a Republican, he does not fit in well with the 2012 GOP.

Why is this so?

Well, Eastwood is pro choice on abortion.

He is pro gay rights and supports same sex marriage.

He believes in global warming and climate change as real.

He was against our involvement in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, and believes America should not be involved in foreign interventions, and avoid being a global policeman.

Is this a Republican in 2012? The answer is NO!

Asian Population Growth More Rapid Than Hispanic Population Growth: US Census Of 2010

The US Census Bureau had released further information regarding the 2010 Census, and it shows that people of Asian heritage have grown even faster in percentage than those of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Asian population growth is nearly 46 percent, while Hispanic and Latino population has increased by 43 percent.

The number of Hispanics and Latinos number about 50.5 million, while the number of Asians is about 17.3 million. The number of African Americans has grown slower, but is at about 39 million.

About 16 percent of the nation is now Hispanic or Latino, while 13 percent is African American, and 6 percent is Asian, making for 35 percent of the nation non white.

The largest Asian groups are in order Chinese, Filipinos, Asian Indian, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese. Small numbers are from Thailand and Pakistan.

Asian is defined as people from the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent, but not including those from Southwest Asia or the Middle East.

Regionally, the number of Asians in the Western states was about 46 percent of the total, followed by 22 percent in the South, almost 20 percent in the Northeast, and 12 percent in the Midwest.

What is perfectly clear is that the estimate that the majority of Americans by the mid 2040s will be non white is becoming more likely every year!

So one day, we are likely to have a President or Presidents who are Hispanic or Latino, and also Asian, making the experience with our first African American President, Barack Obama, an excellent “learning curve” for those who imagine that the white population will continue to dominate.

Ladies and Gentlemen, face the facts and face the future, and do not see the future with trepidation, but rather with pride!

Today Is The 100th Anniversary of The Birth Of Hubert H. Humphrey, America’s Liberal Political Icon!

Today is the 100th Anniversary of the birth of Hubert H. Humphrey–Strongest supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, Co Founder of the Democratic Farmer Labor Party of Minnesota, Mayor of Minneapolis, Promoter of the Civil Rights Movement, Co Founder of the Americans For Democratic Action political organization, Senator from Minnesota, Presidential candidate in 1960, Vice President under Lyndon B. Johnson, Presidential nominee in 1968, Senator from Minnesota again, advocate of many government programs including Medicare, education, Peace Corps, and over 300 other laws–and a man who was the political hero and icon of the author as a young man, and helped to shape the author’s views and ideas on politics and government!

Humphrey inspired many people with his infectious enthusiasm for government activism and decency, but lost a lot of support when he supported Lyndon Johnson on Vietnam policy during his term as Vice President, believing loyalty was essential, despite private doubts about the policy being pursued in Vietnam.

Because of that war, Humphrey led a divided party in 1968, and could not continue the Great Society programs of Johnson, and he was called all kinds of terrible epithets, rather than the long held name he loved, the “Happy Warrior”!

When Humphrey died in 1978, the author wept, and wondered why this wonderful man had been taken from us at the young age of 66 by cancer, while Ronald Reagan, born the same year, would go on to become President and promote programs that in many ways are the center of the troubles we have today in our economy and foreign policy. Not that the author ever wished harm on Reagan, but he has always wondered why Humphrey had to be taken from us at such an early age, instead of contributing to the political debate of the future!

So on this centennial anniversary of the birth of this giant figure in American history, let us honor his memory and dedicate ourselves to the revival of his vision and insights!

The Change In The Democratic Party Image On Foreign Policy: From JFK To Obama

Ever since the failure of John F. Kennedy to overthrow Fidel Castro at the Bay of Pigs fiasco in April, 1961, Democratic Presidents have had to carry the burden of being perceived as weak and ineffective in foreign policy.

Of course, this is not totally the truth as John F. Kennedy negotiated very skillfully through the Cuban Missile Crisis a year after the Bay of Pigs, but the concept stuck to the party image.

In so many cases, it proved to be true in many people’s minds.

Lyndon Johnson escalated our involvement in Vietnam, and could not resolve the conflict in a satisfactory manner, and was forced out of the race for the Presidency in 1968 as a result.

Jimmy Carter was unable to accomplish the goal of rescuing the 52 hostages being held in Iran after the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. and the humiliation of those hostages being held for 444 days still rankles many Americans.

Carter’s inability to stop Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in 1979, and the problems involved in the Cuban wave of immigrants to Florida, known as the Mariel Boat Lift, also doomed his image.

Bill Clinton’s constant threats to intervene in Bosnia with air power, a total of eleven threats, before actual intervention in a successful way, also doomed him as being perceived as weak and ineffective.

The fact that JFK not only handled the Cuban Missile Crisis expertly, but also brought about the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, is forgotten.

The fact that Carter brought about the Panama Canal Treaty and the Egyptian Israeli Camp David Accords is forgotten.

The fact that Bill Clinton brought about the Dayton Peace Accords that ended the fighting in Bosnia; the successful intervention in Kosovo by NATO; and the peace arrangement in Northern Ireland is also forgotten.

And, of course, the fact that Barack Obama overcame the Somali Pirates seizure of a merchant ship in 2009 is also forgotten, conveniently.

But now, with the death of Osama Bin Laden, and the gathering of much evidence that should help the apprehending of more Al Qaeda terrorist operatives, suddenly the reputation of Democratic Presidents may be undergoing a renaissance!

It will be very difficult for the Republican Party to sully the reputation of Barack Obama, as they have been doing for the past two plus years, as a result of this gutsy, courageous, daring decision by Obama to take a chance, realizing it could have been total failure, but demonstrating resolve and commitment to the principle of fighting terrorism wherever it is!

So from April 17, 1961 to the first day of May 2011, exactly fifty years and two weeks apart, the image of the Democrats has now been transformed for the good of the future of the “party of the people”!

Defense Secretary Robert Gates And Future Land Wars In The Middle East, Africa And Asia

A few days ago, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, speaking at West Point, made a very interesting observation regarding land wars and the American future.

He stated that if any future Secretary of Defense was to suggest to a future President that the United States engage in a massive land war invasion in the Middle East, Africa or Asia, that he should have his head examined!

This is a very outspoken statement for a person who is highly regarded, and has served in the CIA and other delicate national security and defense positions, and has been an outstanding Secretary of Defense during the last two and a half years of the Bush Administration and the first two plus years of the Obama Administration.

Gates has been a refreshing and inspirational leader, as he has also made clear that there is waste and fraud in the Defense Department that needs to be cleaned up to save money in the national budget. After having witnessed the tragedy of Robert McNamara during the Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson Administrations and Donald Rumsfeld in the second Bush Administration, committing us to what turned out to be long, drawn out, disastrous wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, it is indeed time for this nation to realize that it is our engagement in foreign wars, trying to impose our values on alien societies, that has led to mass loss of life on all sides and come close to bankrupting us!

The answer for the future is not committing our young men and women to impossible causes in the interests of the defense industries and those who wish to spread Christian doctrines around the world. Rather, it is to work to promote our own internal security from terrorism and to advocate advancement of our society from within!

So Robert Gates should be saluted for his courageous statement, and it makes one wonder: What is Barack Obama’s plan for the future? Isn’t there enough evidence already that it is time to withdraw ground forces from Afghanistan and get out of Iraq and work on the economic problems of this country, which would be so much better if we cut our defense budget from what has become a total tragedy economically, our constant warfare on the battlefields of Asia and the Middle East?