Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
810 bytes added ,  14:06, January 16, 2009
reply re: historian Moyar and LBJ
Line 44: Line 44:  
::::::::: I'm trying to determine if Moyar is a non-conservative.  This http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/opinion/21moyar.html?_r=1 op-ed] by him in the NY Times, with his reference to "Darwinian struggle" and his support of the U.S. leaving Iraq so that it can somehow restore order on its own (without Moyar once mentioning Islam), suggests that Moyar views the world like most who went to Harvard and Cambridge.  That's not conservative and it is susceptible to limitations and bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:34, 15 January 2009 (EST)
 
::::::::: I'm trying to determine if Moyar is a non-conservative.  This http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/opinion/21moyar.html?_r=1 op-ed] by him in the NY Times, with his reference to "Darwinian struggle" and his support of the U.S. leaving Iraq so that it can somehow restore order on its own (without Moyar once mentioning Islam), suggests that Moyar views the world like most who went to Harvard and Cambridge.  That's not conservative and it is susceptible to limitations and bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:34, 15 January 2009 (EST)
 
:::::::::::On Vietnam Moyar is as conservative as they come. In any case I've read many of the original documents myself, as well as LBJ's phone conversations and the newspaper accounts. Johnson was indeed pressured--Ambassador Taylor in Saigon was demanding immediate action, for example, and Democrats were afraid that the public would swing behind Goldwater's hawkish positions leaving LBJ looking too weak to respond to military attacks on the US Navy. It's not true that LBJ exaggerated the threat (and he got Goldwater's explicit support for LBJ's major TV address.) As the coming months proved, Hanoi was dead serious about damaging the US as much as possible. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:59, 15 January 2009 (EST)
 
:::::::::::On Vietnam Moyar is as conservative as they come. In any case I've read many of the original documents myself, as well as LBJ's phone conversations and the newspaper accounts. Johnson was indeed pressured--Ambassador Taylor in Saigon was demanding immediate action, for example, and Democrats were afraid that the public would swing behind Goldwater's hawkish positions leaving LBJ looking too weak to respond to military attacks on the US Navy. It's not true that LBJ exaggerated the threat (and he got Goldwater's explicit support for LBJ's major TV address.) As the coming months proved, Hanoi was dead serious about damaging the US as much as possible. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:59, 15 January 2009 (EST)
 +
 +
::::::::::::This is an interesting discussion and your insights are illuminating.  Perhaps we should have a separate entry about Moyar's own political views, but I'm confident they are not conservative.
 +
 +
::::::::::::There's no way around the fact that LBJ immediately whipped the public and Congress into a fervor by exaggerating the Gulf of Tonkin incident, for LBJ's enormous political benefit.  Every historical account -- except perhaps Moyar -- seem to agree about the exaggeration.  To go on national television as LBJ did, and then obtain the extraordinary congressional approval, ranks almost as high as the day after Pearl Harbor.  That LBJ, the master of "The Treatment," obtain Goldwater's approval for this is of little significance.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:06, 16 January 2009 (EST)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,369

edits

Navigation menu