General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: JFK Conference: James DiEugenio made clear how Foreign Policy changed after November 22, 1963 [View all]Jim DiEugenio
(6 posts)Yes, in my view, it is all but certain JFK was withdrawing from Vietnam.
We now have this from all three military advisors: Bundy via Goldstein's book, and we had it from Taylor and McNamara. Plus the declassified documents on this even convinced the NY Times and Philly Inquirer on this point.
Now, to say that the "coup cable caper" is working both sides, that does not seem to me to be defensible logically.
Why?
Because the new evidence from the ARRB PREDATES the coup cable stuff by three months. So he was withdrawing before any of that happened. And further, as Goldstein states, the coup made no impact on his decision to withdraw.
Finally, if there was any kind of working both sides, then where was the plan to escalate the war after the coup? No one mentions this appearing. And according to you JFK should have brought it out. He did not.
The first sign of any plan to insert any American forces is not until March of 1964 when LBJ requested on from the JCS.
This is what I mean. JFK was not a Cold Warrior in any traditional sense. LBJ was. And to say Kennedy was more hawk than dove ignores this point: Eisenhower inserted combat troops into Lebanon. He threatened atomic weapons in both Korea and Vietnam (Operation Vulture, look it up.) LBJ inserted combat troops into both Vietnam and Dominican Republic and,according to Gordon Goldstein's book, he considered using atomic weapons in Vietnam--with Ike's backing.
Kennedy never committed combat troops anywhere that I know of. And except for the Missile Crisis, when he had to, never considered using atomic weapons. And, BTW, in the Kennedy Tapes, its hard to find anywhere where he specifically talks about the use of atomic weapons even there.
So, yes I stand by my statement.