bust Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Is it just me or is there something oddly familiar here. "The Communists proclaim over and over again that their aim is the victory of communism throughout the world. It is not enough for us to reply that our aim is to contain communism, to defend the free world against communism, to hold the line against communism. The only answer to a strategy of victory for the Communist world is a strategy of victory for the free world." From a Nixon speech leading upto the 1960 elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Dunno. Nixon is before my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 This is a chunk of what he said, but being out of the entire context, it doesn't make much sense to me...like Nixon was just rambling on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Sort of like Gee Dubya ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bust Posted September 14, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Exactly Flash.......seems the rhethoric is the same just a different enemy and time. I have been helping someone who is doing a documentary on unexploded bombs in Laos. We have been looking over speeches made throughout the west at the time of the Vietnam war and it's amazing how similar the speeches are even to the point of virtually word for word but communism is substituted for terrorism. Laos was pretty well forgotton about after Vietnam. She has been working with a MIA unit. They have this huge contingent their searching for any trace or remains of 150 vets who went missing in Laos. 6 helicoptors, vehicles anything they need. She tells me they used to make 1 hour chopper trips just to pick up milk. What really angered her was the lack of support and funds made available to remove the unexploded bombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 Nixon had a strategy that most republicans running for national office has adopted. Campaign to the far right in the primaries to solidify your base and get the nomination, campaign to the center in the national election to get that crucial middle quarter of the undecideds, and govern to the left. You'd be suprised at the very left of center things that occurred under Nixon. From '68 to '74 a host of liberal programs were signed into law by Nixon. Environmental Protection Act, public access for handicap, his trip to Nixon and recoginzing red Chinsa, expanded social welfare, endangered species acts. Clinton used the same strategy from the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaiLuk Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 Is it just me or is there something oddly familiar here. It is exactly the same thing Bust. Only difference IMO is that the current hype of the "terrorist" threat is ridiculous, whereas the communists actually had militaries that *potentially* could have been a threat. Both were hyped, both were stupid, but the current hype is even more stupid. Hope i'm being clear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 Unless I'm mistaken, Affirmative Action started under Nixon. p.s. And it made sense in the beginning, levelling the playing field for the folks who had traditionally got the shaft: American Indians and African-Americans. Unfortunately, the base kept expanding, until something like 60% of the population were considered minorities! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 Women are the majority in terms of population but are minorities for AA sake, also there are a lot of non native Americans, with blonde hair and blue eyes or afros who called themselves indian to get a cut of the casino payoff or entry into law or med school...lol... As far as the original gist of the post, its Orwellian to a certain extent, just replacing one 'enemy' with another. Constant war and having an enemy at all times to keep up a feeling of nationalism and making it easier to keep the populace under control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck6660 Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 Is it just me or is there something oddly familiar here. It is exactly the same thing Bust. Only difference IMO is that the current hype of the "terrorist" threat is ridiculous, whereas the communists actually had militaries that *potentially* could have been a threat. Both were hyped, both were stupid, but the current hype is even more stupid. Hope i'm being clear Mailuk Pull your head out of the sand..."the only good terrorist...is a dead terrorist!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.