Author
|
Topic: a personal debate I had
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 01 April 2003 10:30 PM
quote: he went on to say that the bigwigs in the pro-war movement could easily brush aside the arguments of the anti-war side in defense of what they see as the common good, and that the protests are therefore useless.
This is an argument which overvalues power. For sure, those in power cannot be stopped, now, if they wish to bomb a hospital or two in Iraq. Probably Lyndon Johnson thought the protesters had no power...until he resigned. Probably those who ran the Soviet Union didn't care that people opposed it for its undemocratic nature. They were shortsighted. There is nothing more powerful than an opposition based on principle. If Bush's actions can be shown to be unprincipled, based on lust for oil,or whatever, his presidentcy is finished. This would be a good thing.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
TommyPaineatWork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2956
|
posted 02 April 2003 02:39 AM
I don't think Nixon dismissed the protestors. He might not have ever understood the nature of the importance, but I think his instincts told him something important was going on.There's some poignant old video of Nixon making and impromptu visit to the Lincoln Memorial to talk to protesting youth. He didn't dismiss them. He just couldn't understand them. In my view, it wasn't a generational thing; or something to do with political principles. Nixon just seemed unable to relate to humans on all but the most cynical levels. [ 02 April 2003: Message edited by: TommyPaineatWork ]
From: London | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
lautreamont
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3911
|
posted 02 April 2003 02:49 PM
Tapes released a few months ago of conversations between tricky Dick and Kissinger give further insight into the fine old fellow's state of mind. Nixon, speaking to Kissinger about the idea of bombing Cambodia into oblivion (this may not be an exact quote, but the message is accurate): (say out loud with throaty, gurgly Nixon voice) "That's the difference between you and me, Henry, you're worried about the civilians, and I just don't give a damn." No joke, he said that! My advice is, if you're in a conversation with Henry Kissinger, and HE'S the liberal, it's time to find yourself a good psychologist or something.
From: ABSURDISTAN | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 02 April 2003 02:58 PM
I just want you to think big quote: President Richard Nixon raised the idea of using a nuclear bomb against North Vietnam in 1972, but Henry Kissinger quickly dismissed the notion. "I'd rather use the nuclear bomb," Nixon told Kissinger, his national security adviser, a few weeks before he ordered a major escalation of the Vietnam War. "That, I think, would just be too much," Kissinger replied softly in his baritone voice, in a conversation uncovered among 500 hours of Nixon tapes released yesterday. Nixon responded matter-of-factly. "The nuclear bomb. Does that bother you?" he asked. Then he closed the subject by telling Kissinger: "I just want you to think big."
We survived these two nutbars, maybe we can get lucky again. [ 02 April 2003: Message edited by: JimmyBrogan ]
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290
|
posted 02 April 2003 04:37 PM
Kubrick and Southern got it wrong. In their version it's the president who's more concerned with PR:Muffley: General, it is the avowed policy of our country never to strike first with nuclear weapons. Turgidson: Well, Mr. President, I would say that General Ripper has already invalidated that policy. laughs Muffley: That was not an act of national policy and there are still alternatives left open to us. Turgidson: Mr. President, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, the truth is not always a pleasant thing, but it is necessary now make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless, distinguishable post-war environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got a hundred and fifty million people killed. Muffley: You're talking about mass murder, General, not war. Turgidson: Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say... no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh... depending on the breaks. Muffley: I will not go down in history as the greatest mass murderer since Adolph Hitler! Turgidson: Perhaps it might be better, Mr. President, if you were more concerned with the American people, than with your image in the history books. [ 02 April 2003: Message edited by: JimmyBrogan ]
From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 02 April 2003 07:04 PM
As a person who demonstrated against Nixon and his war, I can tell Babblers that he made a huge deal out of paying them no attention whatsoever. When several hundred thousand protesters came to Washington, his press secretary announced that Nixon was going to be watching a football game all that day. Later, though, Nixon turned up at the Lincoln Monument, drunk, late at night, to talk to a couple of protesters. But the public message was: "Who cares?" quote: I'm reading Ted White's Breach of Faith right now; it's shedding light on the whole thing.
Maybe. But White was a big booster of Nixon, and had written highly laudatory things about his Presidency just months before Watergate brought everything crashing down. If you read "The Making of the President, 1972" which was written maybe three months before Breach of Faith, you will see that the wise President and his wise advisors were, according to White, just to smart for Democratic Presidential candidate George McGovern. Special praise went to Attorney-Generals Mitchell and Kliendienst, both of whom later served prison terms.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 03 April 2003 11:50 AM
quote: I've read John Dean's Blind Ambition and Haldeman's The Ends of Power, and I'm trying to read any of the others I can find.
Reading those is fine, though I think they have a substantial element of apology in them, especially Haldeman. The one book which cannot be missed is "All the President's Men", by Woodward and Bernstein. It is still one of my favourite books, for drama and excitement, but it is also 100% accurate. The other book I would recommend is "Abuse of Power, the New Nixon Tapes". A fair amount of the original Watergate commentary cannot be definitive because the number of tapes available were limited. Now, there are substantially more available, though far from all. This book does a good job of contextualizing the tapes, and of showing Nixon to have been more venal than previously thought.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|