Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 45 of 45
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    Posts
    40,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellowknifer View Post
    It's an ever present threat. It wouldn't be that difficult to successfully argue that it is exactly what happened (except it was interests with huge sums invested in the military who also had support of the CIA).
    I think that's a different (but real threat) than what what we typically call a coup. That's more along the lines of just plain old corruption imo. Corruption is about power and influence as much as money.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    38,506
    It would be described as a non traditional coup. The military isn't forcibly taking over the country, but new leadership who supports the military agenda is. In America a real military coup wouldn't work so well given the level of arms possessed by the average citizen - and the fact the military generally doesn't like to fire on their own citizens without some kind of reason (and usually that reason is if they don't they will get a bullet to the back of the head).

    The last reason gives concern about todays events where many high ranking military officials have been replaced due to ideological differences.
    "There were many ways of not burdening one's conscience, of shunning responsibility, looking away, keeping mum. When the unspeakable truth of the holocaust then became known at the end of the war, all too many of us claimed that they had not known anything about it or even suspected anything."

    - Richard Von Weizsaecker

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    31,787
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFan2003 View Post
    That is pretty disturbing for a president to think that's even possible.
    Disturbing? Interesting word choice. I'd have considered "mundane." That is pretty mundane for a [world leader] to think [a military coup] was possible.

    The proliferation of the war machine in "non-national boundaries expanding type of wars/militarization" (for lack of a better phrase) since that time, makes it an extremely explanatory proposition. If the military intelligence community took the presidency, why tell anyone?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    Posts
    40,305
    Quote Originally Posted by eaglesnut View Post
    Disturbing? Interesting word choice. I'd have considered "mundane." That is pretty mundane for a [world leader] to think [a military coup] was possible.

    The proliferation of the war machine in "non-national boundaries expanding type of wars/militarization" (for lack of a better phrase) since that time, makes it an extremely explanatory proposition. If the military intelligence community took the presidency, why tell anyone?
    In many sure, business as usual. But there are a number of countries where the military is seen as composed of the same citizens that make up the country, not as some elite body outside of the citizenry. The US is one of those countries... Still is in my mind. And that means the soldiers generally feel that way as well.

    In fact I'm not sure what would have happened if the Army had tried to dispose of Kennedy. I don't know if they would have had enough support within the army itself to pull it off, let alone the general population.
    Last edited by PatsFan2003; 06-09-2014 at 09:05 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    31,787
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFan2003 View Post
    In many sure, business as usual. But there are a number of countries where the military is seen as composed of the same citizens that make up the country, not as some elite body outside of the citizenry. The US is one of those countries... Still is in my mind. And that means the soldiers generally feel that way as well.

    In fact I'm not sure what would have happened if the Army had tried to dispose of Kennedy. I don't know if they would have had enough support within the army itself to pull it off, let alone the general population.
    What if the CIA tried to dispose of him? The military is more than just foot soldiers. The grunts weren't going to be storming the White House if that's what you were looking for. Especially if their guy was already in the White House just waiting for the job to open up and the laws to make him the new president.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    Posts
    40,305
    Quote Originally Posted by eaglesnut View Post
    What if the CIA tried to dispose of him? The military is more than just foot soldiers. The grunts weren't going to be storming the whitehouse if that's what you were looking for. Especially if their guy was already in the White House just waiting for the job to open up and the laws to make him the new president.
    Sure... That would have to be the way it would work around here. Get someone the inside. There are some who say LBJ was in on it... I don't know. He didn't seem to be faking it.

    Still you'd have to assassinate the guy or make a really, really, really strong case that he was incompetent or dangerous, not just throw him out.

    Considering that we've had some pretty incompetent presidents and only got rid of them either through an election or a long and painful impeachment process I think we do well in that department. We seem to be stubborn that way.

    We've always been susceptible to influence by the powerful but I do see that as different.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    31,787
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFan2003 View Post
    Sure... That would have to be the way it would work around here. Get someone the inside. There are some who say LBJ was in on it... I don't know. He didn't seem to be faking it.

    Still you'd have to assassinate the guy or make a really, really, really strong case that he was incompetent or dangerous, not just throw him out.
    Yeah. You would have to...

    And think about it a little bit, why would LBJ get all the details? His job was to be president, that's all he had to know. We're not talking about a big team pasta dinner the night before the event to go over everyone's role.

    Considering that we've had some pretty incompetent presidents and only got rid of them either through an election or a long and painful impeachment process I think we do well in that department. We seem to be stubborn that way.

    We've always been susceptible to influence by the powerful but I do see that as different.
    The incompetent ones get to stay in power, and JFK gets assassinated. Hmmmm...

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    Posts
    40,305
    Quote Originally Posted by eaglesnut View Post
    Yeah. You would have to...

    And think about it a little bit, why would LBJ get all the details? His job was to be president, that's all he had to know. We're not talking about a big team pasta dinner the night before the event to go over everyone's role.

    The incompetent ones get to stay in power, and JFK gets assassinated. Hmmmm...
    LOL. You do if you want things to go as planned. LBJ started out as a typical Southern Democrat and changed into a full blown honest to god socialist Liburul!

    And even the Military didn't really want to go into Vietnam. They saw it for the mess it was.
    Last edited by PatsFan2003; 06-09-2014 at 09:54 PM.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    38,506
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFan2003 View Post
    Sure... That would have to be the way it would work around here. Get someone the inside. There are some who say LBJ was in on it... I don't know. He didn't seem to be faking it.

    Still you'd have to assassinate the guy or make a really, really, really strong case that he was incompetent or dangerous, not just throw him out.

    Considering that we've had some pretty incompetent presidents and only got rid of them either through an election or a long and painful impeachment process I think we do well in that department. We seem to be stubborn that way.

    We've always been susceptible to influence by the powerful but I do see that as different.
    Most of the military is composed of decent people who are what you believe. Leadership? Totally different story.
    "There were many ways of not burdening one's conscience, of shunning responsibility, looking away, keeping mum. When the unspeakable truth of the holocaust then became known at the end of the war, all too many of us claimed that they had not known anything about it or even suspected anything."

    - Richard Von Weizsaecker

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    38,506
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFan2003 View Post
    LOL. You do if you want things to go as planned. LBJ started out as a typical Southern Democrat and changed into a full blown honest to god socialist Liburul!

    And even the Military didn't really want to go into Vietnam. They saw it for the mess it was.
    Again, maybe most of the military didn't like the idea of Vietnam. Important positions of leadership viewed it as an important thing to do however. And the reasons for it's importance are much less about preventing the spread of communism and more about the import of drugs (as well as general greed).
    "There were many ways of not burdening one's conscience, of shunning responsibility, looking away, keeping mum. When the unspeakable truth of the holocaust then became known at the end of the war, all too many of us claimed that they had not known anything about it or even suspected anything."

    - Richard Von Weizsaecker

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    Posts
    40,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellowknifer View Post
    Most of the military is composed of decent people who are what you believe. Leadership? Totally different story.
    Believe it or not there have even been decent leaders in the military.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    Posts
    40,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellowknifer View Post
    Again, maybe most of the military didn't like the idea of Vietnam. Important positions of leadership viewed it as an important thing to do however. And the reasons for it's importance are much less about preventing the spread of communism and more about the import of drugs (as well as general greed).
    Sure. At the very least career advancement. Can't be much of general if you never fight a war.

    But they didn't want another Korea where they felt their ability to "do their job" was compromised by those stupid politicians.

    So I'm sure they impressed upon LBJ the need to go full bore if they went in.

    Of that's not what they got, they got something worse than Korea.

    "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face."

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    10,900
    Very interesting read to say the least. While I think most familiar with the story of the time knew it was intense, it is quite revealing to get the perspective from a person who lived it.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    853
    I always wonder what might have happened if a lesser man were President at the time. Kennedy handled the Cuban missile crisis with just the proper mix of strength, caution and reason. To reference Tom Clancy, what if we had a "buckaroo" in charge? Scary thought.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,067
    Back in those days, Kennedy was under huge pressure from the military and CIA. Guys like Gen. Curtis LeMay wanted nothing more than to bomb people back to the stone age.

    If you ever watch the excellent DVD about the Cuban Missile Crisis back in 1962 entitled "Thirteen Days", there's some extra info on it. One is a segment featuring Dino Brugioni, who was a senior official at the National Photographic Interpretation Center, (NPIC). He talked about LeMay's actions during the crisis, and says that someone once asked LeMay what he would do about Cuba, and, according to Brugioni, LeMay commented, "I'll fry it." Brugioni went on to say, he meant it." LeMay was one uber hard ass, someone that is needed if war truly needs to be waged, but IMO not one to be drafting initial geo political strategies.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.