JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Kennedy vs the CIA
Mitch Todd:
--- Quote from: Barry Pollard on July 09, 2018, 04:18:24 AM ---Sources clearly mentioned are both Saigon and Washington, the latter often with presidential approval.
--- End quote ---
The only one clearly mentioned is Starnes acting as Lodge's mouthpiece. The rest are balled up into a nebulous sentence that really doesn't get farther than "reporters with excellent reputations for reliability;" Krock simply presumes who their sources are. Also, Krock didn't say that the President approved of the leakage, only that it had been tolerated and he implied that at some point JFK would clamp down.
--- Quote from: Barry Pollard on July 09, 2018, 04:18:24 AM ---Article is about the administration's internal differences with the CIA.
The Lodge item just one example of info leaked to the press on the conflict.
--- End quote ---
You're reading your own prejudices into the text. It's not the administration vs the CIA, it's unnamed people within the other departments. In fact, it's almost certainly members of the Harriman/Hillman/Forrestal clique within the State Department. For the most part, the CIA opposed removing Diem. The Pentagon generally felt the same way, though, IIRC not as strongly. So did Lodge's predecessor at the Saigon embassy, Fred Nolting. It's not that they thought Diem was the nicest guy, but they didn't see anyone else in SVN that could replace him effectively. As Nolting told Karnow, the choice wasn't between Diem and someone else, it was Diem and chaos. The administration wound up choosing chaos.
--- Quote from: Barry Pollard on July 09, 2018, 04:18:24 AM ---From the esquire piece and relating to Robinson's questioning of Nazis;
"I have sworn on the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man".
That's a hard out for me.
How many of JFK's 16,000 men in Vietnam were CIA? One researcher says most of them, pure black ops warfare and most actions neither recorded or reported, this is after BOP.
As time went on JFK wanted to replace or control them with Pentagon/Army people, true?
--- End quote ---
Well, I stopped at "one researcher says." I have a shortlist of whom that might be, and none of them impress me as effective historians.
--- Quote from: Barry Pollard on July 09, 2018, 04:18:24 AM ---Diem was taken out not for the tens of thousands he killed, nor the thousands he imprisoned, not even for the Budhist situation or his lol, stance on "democratic rights" but rather, because he and his brother were again and consistantly asking the US to leave, so they could begin talks with the north and that, could not be tolerated but everything before that was. Diem would rather deal with the north than have all those foreign troops running around, wasn't "his country" anymore and they couldn't stand it, he wanted out and they got it. Democracy was never a real option, far too unreliable and peace with the north unthinkable.
--- End quote ---
"[Diem] and his brother were again and consistantly asking the US to leave."----sorry, but you're going to have to source that one. I think the Ngo brothers tried to scare the US that once, but no one took it seriously. If Averell Harriman had little use for Diem, Ho Chi Minh had even less. And without US support, Diem wouldn't be able to stand for long against a North Vietnam that was increasingly well supported both Moscow.
And, as I've already noted, Diem wasn't the nicest guy, but neither were his opponents nor his would-be replacements. Value judgments are useless unless you understand the relative value of the possible alternatives.
Mitch Todd:
--- Quote from: Rob Caprio on July 09, 2018, 03:22:47 PM ---Two things. Firstly, it is not foolish to think that JFK was the source if one considers what the researchers wrote -- JFK and Krock were friends. Perhaps it was casual, but JFK would choose someone who he had a relationship of some kind with to get this message out.
Secondly, the issue wasn't just at the embassy level. Numerous sources have said that Lodge himself was not following the orders of the White House. This is no surprise when one considers his longtime issues with the Kennedy family.
The Diems needed to be replaced, not murdered, because they were keeping the vast majority of the American financial support and doing nothing to prepare the South Vietnamese for self-defense. JFK wanted out in term of defense.
--- End quote ---
If JFK were feeding this stuff to Krock, you have a problem. Krock's article is actually fairly sympathetic to the CIAs plight; Krock wouldn't keep pointing out that the CIA couldn't respond to the leakers if he wanted to dump on The Company. He'd have just piled on the accusations already in print.
I have no idea where you got the idea that Lodge was "not following the orders of the White House." He most emphatically was following the instructions given to him in Cable 243. That cable is a story unto itself, and is worth looking up. Essentially, the push to remove Diem came from one group within State. One led by Avarell Harriman, JFK's "Ambassdor at Large." There was an end run around the cabinet involved, JFK was mad for a bit, but he and the other bigwigs in the administration still went with it in the end.
I also have no idea where you get that Lodge and the Kennedys had "issues." Couldn't have been much of an issue, because JFK is the guy who appointed Lodge to the Saigon post in the first place.
As for your accusations against the Ngos, (it's Ngo Dinh Diem and Ngo Dinh Nhu; traditionally, Vietnamese names are surname first), they did a good enough job of keeping the SVN government together. That was in itself an accomplishment; after Diem was removed, the SVN government almost collapsed, convulsing into a series of coups and counter-coups. And 1962 had gone extremely well in the war against the VC. '63 wasn't really all that bad on the battlefield, either, no matter what some will tell you. And, no, they weren't super-shiny statesmen with 2.4 kids and a white picket fence in front of their strategic hamlet. Neither were any of the other guys who wanted to run Saigon, either from the North of the South. Politics ain't the realm of chiorboys.
Ray Mitcham:
--- Quote from: Brian Walker on July 11, 2018, 04:29:27 PM ---I will go with what RFK said in 1964 and 1965. People can have opinions on whether JFK was getting out but nobody knows. Anyone who claims to now should not be taken seriously. JFK still did not have to face the decision to fight or lose. LBJ did have to face that.
JFK was being told the commies would be finished by the end of 1965 so of course he was telling people he was going to pull out then and that is exactly when he said he was going to get out.
One question which to me settles the whole thing. If JFK was planning on pulling out and losing Vietnam why was he going around telling the American people and the world what a disaster it would be for the US if Vietnam was lost to the commies?
--- End quote ---
It was for political reasons, Brian. There was a Presidential election coming up and he was playing to the crowd.... appearing to act tough.
Brian Walker:
--- Quote from: Ray Mitcham on July 11, 2018, 04:33:18 PM ---It was for political reasons, Brian. There was a Presidential election coming up and he was playing to the crowd.... appearing to act tough.
--- End quote ---
That is your theory but that really makes no sense. It would be political suicide to tell the world what a disaster it would be to lose Vietnam and then pull out and lose Vietnam. There was no need for him to make those claims.
He was firm believer in the domino theory and it was not going to be easy for him to pull out and lose Vietnam.
Ray Mitcham:
--- Quote from: Brian Walker on July 11, 2018, 04:43:23 PM ---
He was firm believer in the domino theory and it was not going to be easy for him to pull out and lose Vietnam.
--- End quote ---
That is your theory. He changed whilst he was in the White House. He was going to bring Castro back into the fold, until the powers that be decided he had to go.
They wanted their war and by the assassination they got it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version