Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
It takes a sitting President to deploy troops into combat. Motives aside Kennedy is responsible for America entering Vietnam. Wasn't it Truman who said "the buck stops here". Carter and Reagan are examples of other Presidents who change course on foreign policy during their tenor in the White house. If Kennedy can be excused from Vietnam, the Bay of Pigs, and the deployment of nukes in Turkey because he was just following previous policy then that very same arguement can be used to demonstrate his poor leadership as President.
I guess I'm playing the devil's advocate a little here. I don't think Kennedy
was a terrible President. I just get tired of hearing about his presumed greatness. The world was lucky to survive his Presidency.
|
I think you misunderstood the tone of my post. It wasn't meant to be apologetic to Kennedy, but rather to point out that it wasn't just JFK who decided Vietnam was a threat and worthy of invasion.
Pinning the Vietnam War on Kennedy would be like pinning the Iraq War on George W. Bush. Sure, you could say that 'the buck stops here', and when it comes down to it, he did order the troops in, but really, this war had been coming for a long time just as Vietnam had been prior to the overt aggression, just like World War II (and America's involvement in it) had been coming as well.
I think 'American Liberalism' is fortunate that Kennedy was assassinated, it only served to cement the 'Camelot' obtuseness into the political psyche. If he had been allowed to continue on administering policy the way he had been, I think American Liberalism would've been killed, or wounded stunningly.