Pres. Johnson Mouthpiece Says Right-Wing Politicians Pushed The Vietnam War. Is He Right?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 авг 2024
- All US presidents are controversial characters. Some of my subscribers comment very positively and others very negatively about each one of them. And the Vietnam war is a major subject for viewers on my channel.
Back at 1989 I was making a six part television series on the 1960s called “Making Sense of the Sixties." It was intended to reach high school and college students who at that time were the children of the baby boomer Vietnam war generation. Almost 200 video interviews were conducted with ordinary citizens, historian experts, first hand witnesses, and a few famous folks (not too many of those). George Reedy, the person speaking in this interview about President Lyndon Johnson, was his press for part of his administration and witnessed firsthand much of what went on behind the scenes in Washington regarding the Vietnam war. He wrote a book “Twilight Of The Presidency" that angered President Johnson and Johnson never spoke with him again. He was known as a blunt and direct speaker who said what he thought and that's what he does here.
Many Americans blame President Kennedy for starting the Vietnam war and President Johnson increasing the effort to win it and for committing a huge number of American troops to the battle. George Reedy feels that based on what he saw, it was right-wing Republican senators and congressman who pushed Johnson toward some of the decisions he made regarding the war including the Gulf of Tonkin reaction. I post his comments here without judgment although in my experience regarding this issue, I did not find any other expert presenting his point of view.
We were in Vietnam after the Japanese surrendered and we helped the French when Truman was in office. Let's not forget LBJ is the one who ultimately escalated the war.
And it was Kennedy who escalated American presence in the region. He did so of his own volition, not because right-wingers egged him into doing so.
True
Lots of defensive republicans in here. They led us into Vietnam, sabotaged the peace talks, and then led us into Iraq on lies once again.
@@SeattleScotty Any chance that gun culture and warmongering go hand in hand?
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”
― Karl Marx
I think it’s very telling that Johnson was worried about his legacy and reputation rather than the innocent boys he sent to the slaughter. Typical of most politicians though. It’s all about them and their power and prestige.
And not to mention he was a libral
@@thecatguy4301 gaslighting the libs. Lol
It goes deeper than that. There's a lot of really really really big money being made. All sorts of agendas and power plays happen in times of war.
@@thecatguy4301 So true , the war was a money machine . Was it a coincidence that there was a recession , when Vietnam started winding down ?
@@josephforest7605 Absolutely. Nixon closed the gold window and effectively ended the Brentwoods agreement because the war bank ruptured our country. But the military industrial complex became massive and permanent and profited enormously. Japan actually made billions off of the war. They manufactured massive quantities of material for it.
Just like Iraq and Afghanistan, wars designed to take money from we the tax slaves and hand it over to big business and pay for an ever expanding government.
" An expert is a guy from out of town" - Lee Iacocca
Thanks for this footage this and all of your material is priceless.
Thank you Vicor.
David Hoffman - filmmaker
I second that! Your work is a blessing... it almost feels as if this is what school should have been like
This one was a lie. Vietnam was almost entirely a Democrat war. Read a history book
I love how you upload all of this, thanks. I really enjoy it and find it informative. Please keep this going!
I am and will continue to try. Please subscribe, and if you can, support me on Patreon.
www.patreon.com/allinaday
Thank you.
David Hoffman
What’s great about this interview is that the interviewee has really thought about all of these things to the point where he’s giving insight in almost every segment. These are not canned phrases available in the same form everywhere, but The product of individual experience and insight.
around 14:30 he explains exactly how the Iraq War happened. Any intel that said Iraq may not have WMDs was disregarded and any intel that said that Iraq might have WMDs was amplified. It wasnt given equal weight.
They would have done better if they had flipped a coin. Notice how no one responsible for the invasion of Iraq suffered. All landed on their feet.
Since it was a proven fact that Saddam Hussein had used chemical weapons against both dissident Kurds within his own country, as well as against Iranians during the Iran-Iraq war, concluding that he had chemical weapons later was entirely rational.
@@maxkronader5225 Maybe, but lying about the evidence and refusing to investigate it doesn't give one a blank check to invade the country.
@@SeattleScotty
Frankly, I thought the whole WMD issue was primarily a negotiating tactic to get notoriously pro-appeasement Europeans on board. Because even though Iraq still had some stockpiles of chemical weapons, it's pretty clear that Hussein had no intention to mount them on IRBMs and bombard Europe.
It is an example of the lack of moral courage exhibited by the US government during most presidential administrations of the last 40+ years. If the decision was made that an invasion of Iraq was in the best interests of the US, that should have been an end to the justifications, instead of months of mealy mouthed appeal to reluctant "allies".
They also tortured people looking for that answer. And they gave them what they wanted to hear of course. The soviets did the same thing in 1983. Almost caused a war, because they only expected results on top.
Kruschev said "we will bury you" in 1956, not while JFK was president
It was not 1956, but 1959.
@@ronaldgarrison8478 No, it was November 18th, 1956. He said it in an address to western ambassadors in the Polish embassy in Moscow.
@@Mrjmaxted0291 Sorry, you're right, I should have looked it up. There's actually a Wikipedia page just for that phrase. There was a notable exchange in 1959 about that phrase while Nicky was in the US, and there was much other commentary, interpretation, backpedaling, moonwalking, bunnt hopping, or what have you, on many occasions, including further things said by the man himself. Of course, people nowadays never speak that carelessly…
If I remember correctly that quote was stated in an economic context. It was Not a provocation to physical war.
That was a miss translation he said we will live to see you bury or the USSR will just out last the USA
What in God's name has happened to this country? There are no mature, measured, well spoken adults anymore
It got progressively worse after WWII, especially when both parents started working.
Deep insight into the subtle chaotic strife of "good intentions"
Imposing America's will on the Vietnamese wasn't well intentioned at all. It was flat out imperialism.
Listening to this, I thought "this is why we need geography to be taught in the schools more intensively".
It would make little to no difference. It seems many here are blaming the educational system or parents for our problems. Our problems go much deeper than that. If you want to really teach kids how to get on in this world, and understand what's important and what's not, immerse them in the skills that will make them independent as possible from the grid. Compel them to make a connection between themselves and where their food comes from, how hard it is to build a shelter, what it takes to stay warm in the winter, something about what hunger feels like and not knowing where your next meal is coming from. Make them understand what they need to fight for. Make them understand that if they have something, someone else or something else wants it and you need to know how to defend it. Kids in China know this and it is why they will eventually kick our ass. And sorry, you can't learn this out of a book. Perspectives, the way you see the world and how you interact with it comes from real life and sometimes hard experience. Schools are mostly babysitting services where they are insulated from the real world.
@@DavidSmith-fr1uz "Kids in China know this and it is why they will eventually kick our ass." Clearly you've never been there. They are one of the softest, most gullible populations I've ever come across.
Where they will beat us is huge government funding in AI and quantum computing.
@@DavidSmith-fr1uz Christ. Just say you want to make fascists. That’s all this post will end up doing.
Never knew that JFK was republican.
U people love that statement
@centervilletn With the yoyo that's running the Country today? If JFK were a Republican, he'd be the biggest thorn on Trump that you could ever imagine. He'd be campaigning, like Ted did on Carter, to overhaul the leadership.
Eisenhower was. Most of the country at the time was so severely interested in the concept of the cold war. The Cold War despite it being a capitalist's dream as far as weapons manufacturing, destabilized the world. This destabilization gave us Vietnam for one. Trillions was made in the Vietnam war.
One of the indicators of this Cold War cash grab, profit bonanza, was the supposed "Missile gap". There wasn't one. But, Raetheon, General Electric, Boeing etc, made a lot of money, making up for that missile gap.
Who started this intervention? Conservative politicians. It had the benefit of fighting against "Communism" at home. (which also helped destroy the Unions. Unions were often organized by Socialists and Communists in the 20s-40s)
@@k3v1n47 and Eisenhower urged Kennedy not to enter Vietnam
@@adammuncy8475 US troops were already there.
I love the contemporaneous information. This is why we must do better. We have recorded data , literally wisdom of hindsight and yet in my 45 years we've done it all again and again. Over and over.
It's the parents fault. It's so hard to make a concise statement out of it though...
We raise kids like pets to groom, or furniture to look at instead of teaching them everything they need.
@@iBloodxHunter And why did the parents do what they did? It was their parents fault and so on infinitum. You have made the assumption that the parents had fee will. In this day, when they are bombarded by media brainwashing and government policies that keep them slaves to materialism! Next, you'll be blaming the teachers. It is what it is. Move on.
You've paraphrased one of Marcus Aurelius' sayings quite well. Things happen over and over, so we only need to know about 40 years' worth of history.
It was delightful to watch. Thanks for such an informative documentary, Mr Hoffman.
Thank you Vaibhav.
David Hoffman-filmmaker
LBJ was the most incompetent Democratic President during the Cold War.
Right-Wing/Republican leaders are the reason why Vietnam totally fell under Communism in 1975. Democrats tried to end the war while the Republicans escalated it.
The Vietnam War would have ended with a peaceful armistice if the Democrats where in Control of the White House and the Legislature at that time.
Nixon, illegally invaded a country while peace process was ongoing in Paris, which caused the North to advance attacks on the South and withdrew from the peace accords.
Majority of Americans with the support of the Democrats knew that Vietnam was becoming a pointless War with too many massacres, which was the main reason of the Anti-Draft and Anti-War movements.
Republicans claim to be Anti-Communist are just burning fire, they start their Anti-Communist crusade which leads to a pointless war and too many casualties, which like what happened in the Iran-Contra affair.
The Vietnamese in the US who register as Republicans do not even realize that they are supporting a Political Party that caused Vietnam to fall totally under Communism.
Hearing this man back then talk about the radical right wing of the republican party is a pretty haunting realization that nothing ever changes.
Today the democrats are the warmongers.Some of them would like to take on Russia after glossing over the communist government so many years ago.This has all changed in the face of Ukraine.
Lol, it's a boogie man.
Eisenhower warned the public of a military-industrial complex. Eisenhower said nothing about a military-industrial complex only as it is overseen by Republicans.
Right wing/left wing politics are not the problem. Greed and human nature is the problem. Washington is replete with right wing/left wing Republicans and Democrats who fully support the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower tried warning us about. They support it, because in their lust for power and wealth they use the military-industrial complex to build and maintain their little empires; just as most of us would. The bickering between right wing and left wing exists simply to keep the people distracted from the real problem.
Very good interviewer. I was a teen during this time and the draft did make me think about where I was headed. The news journalists only gave small bits on TV at that time, never revealing the gore. 68 tet was the turning point. The living room war was over. Johnson hated negative news even if it was true. Very accurate filming Mr Hoffman
I am of the opinion that it wasn't just the draftees, but the lottery that made the difference. When guys couldn't just get a deferment for college, suddenly everyone was at risk. I actually - from my own inexperienced point of view - think that the college protest stuff was almost irrelevant, but when the draft encompassed more people, the days of the Vietnam War were limited.
side note to the draft. When Nixon stopped conscription- the protests ended.
This is one of the best interviews I watched so far! Thanks Mr. Hoffman
There is an interesting dichotomy between the world's view of American history and Americans' view on American history.
Yes!
Fa real
Gulf of Tonkin and LBJ.
Enough said.
I was very fortunate that my state senator in Congress was the brilliant Wayne Morse of Oregon, the Tiger of the Senate, one of only two US senators opposing the Vietnam war at the time.
The other being Fulbright.
"The American People will not fight for the status quo ante."-Huh? Isn't that essentially what happened in Korea? For that matter, wasn't that initially the idea in the Civil war? In the War of 1812? Our wars have not generally been like 1942. Total victory in WW 2 seems to have seriously clouded our vision.
Grew up in the 60s born 1958 very exciting time with the space race but a very sad time with civil rights-assassinations-demonstrations of all types- burning of our city's and the big one Vietnam however people felt about the war the veterans took the brunt of it they were not treated with the respect they deserved and earned they went their and fought their because our country sent them there God bless our Vietnam veterans and Thank you for your service I always felt because of what you guys went through my generation didn't have to again Thank you
"We have met the enemy
and he is us."
-Walt Kelly
Pogo!
Wish i was a boomer.
Born in 90. I feel like it is right at the end to see the end of an era
This actually might have saved my midterms. Thank you so much for posting, this video is Godly
It's also false. This jackass's whole thing is "the devil made us do it". It's a great example of what poor leadership looks like.
This is ridiculous. It’s not far right people that did this or pushed for action In Vietnam. Then why did Kennedy and Johnson approve military action and advising at the beginning....even to and through Johnson’s entire re-election...and his entire time as President he pushed and pushed for more troops. He approved of the action. The battle plans. If he didn’t agree he could’ve pulled out.
Fort Bragg, 1955. Day room, 64th Headquarters, 20th Engineers.
A flickering television carried the trial of the Emmett Till killers.
The jury, the judge, the gallery were chummy with the accused. There were smiles and even laughter during the procedure.
In the room with me was an African American Green Beret. When the trial was over I said: “ I hope to God we don’t go to war because we will be shooting each other instead of the enemy.”
He said: “ I’d like you to meet my captain! We have lots of dedicated people in Indochina,”
Since that meant a short discharge and a reup for six years minimum...and my knowledge that I could not endure the training...I passed.
He never showed his feelings about the spectacle we just witnessed.
Sergeant Moore. I hope he survived Viet Nam.
Absolutely wonderful interview!
Love your interviews, they really are something above most other.
Have to say.
I'm a guy sitting in Sweden and experiencing how another nation went through times in a very different way than we over here in the fringes of Europe. It really is magical how you capture all these people and what they believe.
Typical that LBJ would only worry about how he will look in history rather than what's best for the country. Eisenhower's involvement was do to the Secretary of State forced on him - John Foster Dulles. The Dulles family were major arms dealers for generations. His brother Allen Dulles became CIA director, and much evidence suggests that he and Johnson and others were involved in Kennedy's murder. The irony of Vietnam is that we sent troops thousand of miles away to fight communism, and in doing so, promoted it at home. The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia has a more logical explanation for why we were there. Nothing learned, obviously, except by the MI complex - eliminate the draft and no one will care. Hence, Afghanstan.
Mouthpiece is a harsh term for George Reedy. He was the White House press secretary. This interview was much later.
it sounds like a republican sent in 5000 advisors, but a democrat did the rest.
Hey look its Jimmy Glick.
He has a beautiful voice but an awful memory! He he.
fascinating . . . A Bright Shining Lie says something similar, the culture in the Pentagon simply didn't allow for the possibility that the strategy in Vietnam was flawed, and the Vietnamese were motivated to tell the Pentagon what they wanted to hear.
They had control of the situation. Guys out in the field told them it would not be easy. LBJ wouldn't listen. This guy's just trying to shift blame.
George Reedy speaks as if he had no stakes in the Vietnam war. It's always like "They" sent draftees, "they" started... Reedy is gone now for 20 years, so I don't wanna judge him. But his talk is a reminder that politicos weren't way different from how they are today.
This guy really knows his stuff! Those jowls hold wisdom
Very good interview. Great share.
last place I expected to see you :D
Vietnam had been at war for decades by that point,those Villagers were hardened and not stupid.
Man, this guy is perfect for radio
For a person from the U.S. , to admit that Americans don't know much about Canada is something .But, being a Canadian and Canada being a former British Colony , it was a surprise , that the British do not know much about Canada.
That war greatly accelerated the decline of this country.
Try to watch this video from start-to-finish without passing judgement over the title.
Was just thinking the same thing
Too late for me because I have already made a comment but I will go back and edit it if necessary
Nate Marx:Yeah,right.
No actual lies? Did he read the Pentagon Papers?
A very clear and interesting explaination of Vietnam... George was very easy to listen to - I could listen to this guy talk for hours 🔥
It was Democrats Kennedy and Johnson that pushed the country into Vietnam. Georgie trying to re-write history.
I clearly remember this man on tv daily.
My dad was training in an F4 and we were getting a fair number of pilots returning from 67-68.
Everything that came out of this guys mouth was contradicted by hundreds of pilots.
So north and south Vietnam fought first, and we backed the south...sent 5,000 soldiers to train south Vietnam soldiers...and then more were sent and couldn't just sit there in idle so they started going on observations/missions and that's when the cycle went bad. So the old thinking was if you joined the military forces without being drafted from the general public, you went in knowing you would die, but when the draft happened you weren't personally expecting to die but just fight...IMO It's strange president Johnson didn't realize that the real reason our men were used was because of south Vietnam greed to win against the north originally and they wouldn't stop because of "status quo ante"... Question is "what did we really gain"...it's beyond sad the only reason we sent more men originally is to make our nation think that the original sacrifices held "notable causes and we need to make sure there sacrifices wasn't in vain"... America was known as the great imperial. The Vietnam played us, when technically they lost there own game and then blamed us for losing by feeding BS they "thought we wanted to hear" that we passed to the president...
wow.............................................................
Thank you for posting this important information.
Great insight from someone who lived close to power.
Iraq, Libya, maybe soon to be Syria or Iran; this is the issue of a large military: it needs to be used otherwise it is just rotting away and getting angsty
My brother who sadly passed away recently was a paratrooper in Vietnam back in 1961. He was 18 years older than me. I didn't know until I was 12.
It was appalling to my parents. They paid attention to how the U.S got involved in Vietnam's mess. It was the conservatives who got us started.
There were no US airborne units stationed in South Vietnam in 1961?.
God this channel is great, a retrospective of the time context, that's the best history.
Thank you Mohamed for your comment. If your resources allow, I would sure appreciate your using the THANKS button under any of my videos including the one you have commented on. It is something new that RUclips is beta testing and would mean a great deal for my continuing efforts.
David Hoffman filmmaker
This guy reminds me of McNamara. He sounds just like him.
Hey, Mr Hoffman. Another amazing video, thank you! I have a minor but potentially quite useful suggestion; which is to put a link in the description to other videos with the same speaker or from same piece. This way people can more easily navigate through a set of videos, and in the correct order.
Keep up the good work!
Thank you I like the suggestion. But there is only one comment by this guy on my channel.
@@DavidHoffmanFilmmaker Ah, Sorry for the confusion. I was actually just watching the Jack Beatty interview segments which is where I thought of this idea.
So refreshing to hear this insight !!
Excellent interview!
This was very interesting. His perspective and manner of speaking were really intellectually engaging.
He’s 100% full of shit. Johnson ramped up Vietnam and Nixon ended it. The CIA was pissed so they set him up. Vietnam was where the CIA funded black budgets with heroin money. That’s why we didn’t fight to win. When we left they had to move to cocaine for black budget money.
@@zackattack635 That's possible but, I still found this interview to be intellectually stimulating.
Mr. Hoffman, thank you for another interesting video.
Just about every person I know who fought in Vietnam knew it was a bad war. For me, the reality of questionable ‘rules of engagement’ and doubtful ‘no fire zones’ were my first clues.
Although I can’t agree with everything in this video, the speaker had my attention and I hung on to much of what he said.
Despite a few concerns with Ken Burns’ work on his Vietnam project book and film, it probably is an authoritative perspective on early Vietnam fighting. I recommend this speaker reads it, or sees the video, if he’s still around. If he really was with the Johnson administration then I also have some pointed questions for him.
May the ghosts of war plague the Johnson family to eternity, and to the families of others responsible, i.e.; Robert McNamara (the ‘McNamara 100,000’ plan can never be forgiven). One of the major problems with the Johnson administration (and LBJ had many) was that he ran the war, not the Generals. And he did it from the freaking Whitehouse. As already been said many times in varied commentary, books and papers - had the Vietnam war been conducted exclusively by the Generals the war would have lasted merely months to a couple years. Why the Johnson administration ran the war instead of the warfighters is still a mystery today (maybe not - the Johnson family built tremendous wealth in the latter years). Civilians should never ever interfere into the work of Generals and Admirals. Shame on the Johnson administration! 56,000 brave courageous American lives lost because of him. Let’s be clear about this: most of the ‘cream’ of elitist American youth had deferments which kept them out of the military and out of the war. The other cowards fled to Canada.
And, it should never be forgotten are the millions of lives destroyed among the indigenous populations in Indochina and SE Asia.
Elaborate explanations based in truth and fact are used to define the Vietnam War. But, ‘lies and excuses’ are part of that history and that is also based in fact.
Obviously there was human error, but it was greed that perpetuated the long Vietnam War. That’s right, I said it, and I will die believing it.
There two seperate problems.
The first is when Truman let McArthur run the war in Korea, he ignored political and military warnings, moved troops up to the Chinese border because battlefield logic trumped Chinese political threats in his mind and caused one of the biggest retreats and disasters in American military history.
So the politicians weren't going to trust the Generals for a generation or two.
The second is that Vietnam is a sideshow, its military theater where the Americans show to the Soviets and chinese that they are militarily capable, well armed and have the best technology so don't try anything in more valuable places like western europe.
America cant lose or retreat because it will weaken them in europe, the Soviets and Chinese are trying to cause that.
Washington is trying to win the big picture, that doesnt make any difference to a grunt on the ground who is being asked to die for a useless field in an irrelevant country thats only being fought over because two feuding governments are bickering like a bad divorce.
I disagree with Mr. George Reedy, on the right wing..but..I could listen to him all day. He had been with Johnson for a long time. He quit over the way Johnson was running the Vietnam War...
[the origins of war in child abuse]here.
Just set me to slightly askew. Perfect. Thanks.
I didn't really get the idea that the title is what this man said. It seems that the blame could pretty equally be shared.
I don't discount what this man says. But I think the only way to even hope to get an accurate picture of events this massive, is to take in the voices from all sides first and then compare and distill them. No one person, no matter how honest or well intentioned can give us the entire picture.
"Right wing republicans" as opposed to left wing republicans?
Just seems a bit redundant
I think it is meant to say something more like "far-right" or further right Republicans. As to separate them from centrist Republicans.
@Woohoo neocons
@Woohoo Do you really think that? Because I was old enough to remember both sides calling for war in Iraq and Afghanistan, except pretty much Bernie Sanders, and now both sides of mainstream Republicans and Democrats call for war in Syria
@@scasey1960 If you truly believe that you need to look at a history book. The great interstate highway was made for war reasons first and foremost. Goldwater was a loser in politics. And Nixon prolonged war in Vietnam, who hated women working outside the home and hated gays.
Reedy voice sounds like Bill Belichick
Status quo ante, Latin for "the way things were before.
Mr. Reedy is perfect to listen to. Thank you, David, for sharing your life's work. Amazing, addictive.
I always thought we went to Vietnam for the rubber that just sticks in my mind,
Of course they did, but remember that the American Government really is not a dichotomy. There is no Left or Right, just America, and it was founded on slavery and murder.
See Hegelian Dialectic.
"People will not fight for the way things were before the war started"... if that isn't real insight, i don't know what is.
What have we learned from all of this insightful observation and analysis? We never had to fight, all we need to be is prosperous and be true to ourselves. When we do this, all will be drawn to us. Talk about swaying hearts and minds...we are far more powerful than we know!
Lousy title. Reedy was LBJ's press secretary, and obviously an intelligent individual on the scene with his own mind, reaching his own conclusions on these matters. The 'who lost china' meme was from the right, the man who took it upon himself to assassinate Diem was Republican Ambassador Lodge, who ignored State Department instructions, acting precipitously and autonomously with the CIA after he had been in the country only a few months. There was also the hawkish anti-communist faction of the left, exemplified by Kennedy. But no reason to ignore or discount agitation for intervention in Indochina by the right. In 1964, Goldwater campaigned to the right of Johnson on Vietnam, for example. The base of support for the escalation of the war also came from the Republican party (obviously with some dissent from the likes of Hatfield, Case and Sherman Cooper). This was quite definitely a bipartisan war wagon.
Mr. Reedy had good insights into this whole dirty business of VietNam...I agree with him. His talking about the Georgia Senator who had been initially against getting involved in VietNam but said that the thing to do was to attack and take Hanoi ( and hopefully end the war ), instead of just dragging it on & on & on with no intention of actually 'winning'. This has been my ( and a lot of other's thinking too ), point since the 70's about why I was against that officially undeclared war: we weren't fighting it to win...Washington and the Pentagon were using VietNam as a purely political pawn; playing for a stalemate at best. And our thousands of young men & women were the expendable pawns and dying for that political end. This was outrageous to me and to many others. If our young men & women are to be sent to a far distant land to fight for someone else's "freedom", then let's fight to win just as we did in WWll...all out warfare...make the enemy pay the price a hell of a lot more than us..!! And Mr. Reed was correct when he said that in the early 60's, most people didn't have a clue where VietNam was or what was..and had been...going on there for quite a few years already. I really enjoyed listening to Mr. Reed, a very articulate man. Thanks, David..!!
Love these films!
I was born in 1960 and I knew that we were in Vietnam. I must have missed something ... how could anyone not know we were in Vietnam, it was in the news every night.
He is speaking about the Eisenhower and Kennedy era.
We were in Viet Nam when Eisenhower was president. I know guys who were there in the late 50s.
Reedy was one of LBJ's best cabinet resources, so he has my ear. But I can't stand to hear him say that people won't fight for the status quo ante, because recent events have shown they will. The entire thrust of American conservatism since the 1990s, culminating in the election of Donald Trump, has been an attempt to re-establish the status quo ante (i.e., ante-Obama, ante-Civil Rights era). The American right has been engaged in a very long, protracted, and sometimes covert campaign of racial and cultural "restoration" for a very long time, and in recent years their fight has escalated to the point of violence.
The uniparty has ALWAYS existed.
It's interesting that he refers to the Vietnamese as primitive, and this is after the experience of acknowledging the mistake of US superiority in the Vietnamese War. I'm sure this attitude was even worse when he was in the thick of it, and prevalent amongst LBJ and co. Maybe, if there weren't so convinced of their own superiority, then the war may not have even happened.
can you see the contrast ? the education among people then and now.
the difference as the whole picture is drastic
And other men will be held to account for the loss of many lives..and will cry as children seeing the truth...THOU SHALT NOT KILL SAYETH THE LORD ON MT SAINAI...!!!
I lived through this time. Johnson was a narcissist that no one liked. The Kennedy assassination was just dreadful and had a devastating psychological effect on the American people. The boomer generation went off the rails from that horrific act and the Vietnam War.
It is a sad fact that these historical facts were the ignition of the beginning of the end.
I agree completely, B Good.
You said it perfectly
I've never heard that phrase used, "status quo ante". Had to stop, & figure out what he meant.
Excellent points from this former Press Secretary. In the documentary DVD "The Fog Of War", the irony of Robert S. McNamara's position as Defense Secretary under Kennedy and Johnson - to escalate the war to prevent the "Domino Effect" - was made clear at the end of the film. McNamara, in the 1990s, sitting in a meeting with North and South Vietnamese military leaders, reflecting upon the war, finally admitted that the conflict between North and South Vietnam was a Civil War and was not about any "dominoes falling".
I still remember my parents watching the news of Nam every night 'my older brother Wes in Nam at that time 'the looks on their faces the worry the anguish the body counts 'there was no joy for 18 months he made it home alive later on had problems with drugs ' he told my parents don't let them take his little brother 'me ='my draft number was 316 to high or them to reach me 'but in a way I never got my big brother back 'for what we lost no disrespect to those that served but we were not supposed to Win that's what he told me so for what ?
Small critique of this great clip: title might be more enticing if it was titled, 'Expert explains how right wing politicians pushed the US into Vietnam,' or something like that. I just feel like starting the title with 'He' is missing the power of clickbait. The real clickbait isn't in the 'he', it's in the 'right wing' part. Thanks anyway maybe i'm getting too critical.
I just tried a version of your title, which was too long for RUclips. Thank you.
David Hoffman - filmmaker
We made a grave mistake pulling out of Vietnam
No, we made a mistake going in.
he’s melting
How did the “right wing” sending ambulances in the 1950s lead to Vietnam? Why did this same “right wing” go along with Eisenhower destroying McCarthy? Wasn’t the right wing demolished in the 1964 election? Reedy is correct in that our system makes it far easier to deploy military forces than to withdraw them. Look at how the military supposedly lied to Trump about the withdrawal of for es from Syria. Tge biggest howler is that “The government doesn’t lie”.
This guy is spot on 100%.
Quick background on Vietnam:
Mayor of Marseille, France, Simon Sabiani. Paul Carbone and François Spiritu all enlisted and fought in WWI. The returned home heroes of France. Simon Sabiani becomes Mayor of Marseille; and the Corsicans Spiritu and Carbone have all the political protection they need. Their heroin refinery was just up the road from Marseille, France.
Mayor of Marseille, France, Simon Sabiani. Paul Carbone and François Spiritu acted as enforcers for Simon Sabiani during his tenure. They and other Corsican Mafia members controlled the French underworld and they were some of the original Corsican Gangsters. The Corsican Mafia were part of the French military and were considered heroes to France and they were all very close with every political entity in France.
Carbone and Spirito were also active in Paris, where the Prefect of Police, Jean Chiappe, was a friend of Paul Carbone’s.
Then Paul Carbone, François Spiritu collaborated with the Germans in WWII. They were with the Vichy Regime. Also with the Vichy Regime: Auguste Ricord. Ricord was one of the leaders during Vichy French period and was a leader in the Corsican Mafia too. He robbed the Germans after the war and opened his first heroin refinery, just outside Marseille, France.
Marcel Francisci was born in Ciamannacce in 1919. As a young man, he fought with the Free French Forces in Italy during World War II and was awarded four medals for acts of heroism, including the Croix de Guerre. After the armistice with Italy, he was recruited into the Corsican Mafia by Jo Renucci and began smuggling cigarettes and silk stockings between Tangiers and Marseilles. During this time, he also established narcotics contacts in various Arab countries.
It seems all the French Corsican Mafiosi were also involved with having defended the country in military uniform and were supporters and friends of all the local politicians and police. Much more than in America, who the mafia had a hard time because of the exposure and the lack of a connection to the military. It would have been like Lucky Luciano had enlisted in the US Army and came back a war hero. Luciano would have had to have bunked during the war with someone who would become the Mayor NYC, Detroit or even the President of the United States. The Italian Mafia never had that connection although they tried like hell. Charles De Gaul, who seems to have spanned the Corsican underworld and the legitimate worlds. De Gaul knew about all the illegal business coming out of Vietnam. He was a General and served government until he was elected President of France January 8, 1959. He knew everything and was tight lipped and deceiving. Any biographical account will point out De Gaul’s personality.
Charles De Gaul must have known all these Corsican men and was perfectly ok with Vietnam and American involvement, even though he criticized it at the end of his life. De Gaul’s critique was a faux finish. He’s a liar. America was honoring a NATO agreement which the French and De Gaul had sowed the seed of discontent about “American Credibility”. They said they can’t rely on American involvement in the NATO agreement. That America would not fully come to aid the French. We went into Vietnam partially because of this prodding, but we didn’t know that by defending the French, we supporting the French underworld. Nor did the Americans know that the two were inseparably fused. The Italian Mafia were really only criminals. In the The French Corsican Mafia it is radically different. The Corsican Mafia and the French Military and Government have been connected since WWI. Many of them enlisted to go to WWI & WWII. They were criminals who were war heroes. They were best friends with Heads of state, Chiefs of police and even the Mayor of Marseille, France who had all fought war with them. Some Corsican Mafia figures were war prisoners with future French heads of state, people with the French Resistance or Vichy French Regime collaborators. The Corsican Mafia had made it into the American CIA, via OSS in large numbers after WWII. One of them was Henry Cabot Lodge’s right-hand man, Lucien Conein. Lucien Conein was changing uniform American, to Vichy French to any uniform that would put him behind enemy lines. He was a professional intelligence officer who got his start in the French Foreign Legion in Vietnam when he was 19.
Marcel Francisci was part of a Gaullist militia. This was one of the handful of people who were part of the famous “French Connection”. This connects Charles De Gaul directly to the Corsican Mafia. De Gaul was known for being grandiose and saying all kinds of wild things. He was a mouthpiece, but he would never go off the ranch because he knew they would kill him.
In short, The French Corsican Mafia was embedded in Vietnam and all the colonies of France. They were always with the military, French Foreign Legion or as Marcel Francisci was in a Gaullist Civic Action Service. The Corsican Mafia became embedded in the US CIA as they were the best candidates to work in Vietnam. They spoke fluent French and some spoke fluent Vietnamese also. They were recruited by the OSS and some went CIA. Ho Chi Minh did not make into the American CIA. Many of the Corsicans were assigned to Vietnam because of language skills and some knew Vietnam very well. Some had fought Dein Bien Phu 1954 and had been there for 10 years earlier.
Henry Cabot Lodge was a scorned politician, but by August 1963, he was all in. He and others voted to override JFK’s orders and killed Diem. Then killing JFK 20 days later to continue all French and American industry in Vietnam and, don’t forget, the most lucrative trade was the heroin trade. That is just a fact. The rubber and tire industry pales in comparison to the heroin trade in South East Asia from 1957-1967. You have to see the change in mass production upon the arrival of Ellsworth Bunker in late 1967. The Sugar Refinery expert showing up in 1967 is so interesting. Why did we need a sugar refinery expert as our Ambassador to Vietnam? Bunker didn’t even know the country. Bunker was there to produce heroin on a massive scale, that’s it. Bob “Blowtorch Bob” Komer of the CIA was serving with the rank Ambassador from late 1967 running "the other war" until he leaves Vietnam for Turkey. Such a strange story.
Some of the processing Poppies into drugs were for legitimate use such as as morphine, but the back door sales were the Corsican Mafia, Sicilian Mafia and the Italian American Mafia. The heroin trade dwarfed all other industries. This illegal business made more than the Gross National Product of the wealthiest country in the world at the time, on a monthly basis. The way Nixon gets in there is a wild story because RFK would have won and stopped the war in Vietnam, effectively ending the heroin trade. Turkey was closed for poppy production with Bob Komer was serving in Turkey; South America was not developed enough yet for drug production. RFK is shot dead and Nixon was not pulling out of Vietnam, so the drug dealing escalates in a way never seen before. It wasn’t in broad daylight after Nixon got in, but it was pretty obvious that it was being produced at 10x the rate. They were doing 100’s of tons of heroin a month exporting heroin. Heroin trade peaked in 1969 courtesy of Ellsworth Bunker the sugar refinery expert. Bunker doesn’t leave until May 11, 1973. De Gaul was playing the political world stage protecting a lucrative, Corsican French Mafia drug trade and all legitimate trade like the rubber and tire industries. Tires made $1-$2 billion annually. Heroin made $100's of Billions monthly.
The Vietnam War era is still the most interesting period of history for its cultural revolutions and the seismic change from colonialism economy to the trade economy of the modern era. I will be busy studying this subject all my life. These videos are fueling my research. Really awesome man!
The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia. Change a few names and dates and you have the politics of heroin in Iraq and Afghanistan.
@@cfwintner1 I studied the Phoenix Program on the graduate level and I fell upon the heroin narrative, Vietnam. It is a big history that was actively covered up by the CIA for many years. Much has come out, but there are many smaller histories that are gone. I hope to recover a few smaller histories before I end research.
I won't be moving on to Afghanistan or Iraq. I stay on Vietnam. I'm specialized. I am sure that all kinds of the same happened in the Middle East, but my head is going to explode if I open a new topic. A younger historian, has to cover those topics. It takes unbelievable effort to climb through the all the material.
I know the US Military was basing their WOT on the Phoenix Program, that was published US Army War College 2005. I am a little shocked that they did the exact same thing in the Middle East, but I shouldn't be shocked anymore. It sure makes sense that suddenly the heroin is coming from Afghanistan.
Brilliant!
Great interview
spot on
LBJ should have taken Howard K. Smith's advice. Smith the famous journalist who was formerly the anchorman of ABC News whose own son Jack Smith, now deceased like his father and himself a former television journalist and Vietnam veteran who had been in the first major battle against the NVA (North Vietnamese Army) in Quang Tri Providence I believe is memory serves me, and who draped the body of a dead fellow American over himself when his unit's position had been overrun by the NVA giving the impression to the NVA who were going through and murdering the wounded that he was also dead. Smith had a personal off the record meeting at the White House with the president and knowing Johnson's frustration about the progress in the war suggested that Johnson simply declare victory and withdraw American forces. Johnson explained he didn't wish to do that because he was certain that the terribly corrupt South Vietnamese government would fall in short order after America had withdrawn their forces and the nation would become part of the communist world and would get the same treatment Truman got after China fell to Mao's forces.
And everyone knows that was the accusation that Truman and his State Dept. that was riff with communist sympathizers and fellow travelers such as Alger Hiss "Lost China". Johnson who was in the Congress then remembered it all quite well. So his response to Smith was that "I don't want to be the first American president to lose a war!" Smith left the White House that day dumbfounded by the response understanding the lives of many young Americans were in jeopardy simply because of the president's concern over how his legacy in the historical record would be perceived. How utterly nonsensical is that. By the time I was there during Nixon's term it was a foregone conclusion among almost everyone including the officer corps that the war would end like it did, with our withdrawal after some accord brokered in Paris and that it would quickly be lost to invading NVA forces, which is exactly what happened and what Johnson sacrificed his legacy to anyway.
I knew we had in troops in that part of the world even before Kennedy was dead. I was just in high school but I subscribed to and read Newsweek mag. Newsweek, and I assume all of the other establishment organs, ran endless stories about the Green Berets, the topic of counterinsurgency generally, and the geopolitical significance of Southeast Asia as the world's great "rice bowl" and the great "domino theory" battleground. Darn, it was the very hinge of fate, so we were led to believe. The build-up job leading to the war in Vietnam was something very seriously engineered from the behind the scenes, and it involved the publications and media that were the outlets of the Eastern Establishment and the CIA. It was bigger than any president. Don't doubt it.
You lost me when he said know the ppl in the government dont lie but besides that good interview
seriously, where do you get people like this to interview?! I`ve never hard it from that perspective and even with all the information out today it still shocks me to my core, tough I`m not even amaricen and therefore have not lost anyone to this BS