JFK: Traitor?

[rosco rathbone]

In his short presidency, John F Kennedy made every attempt to stymie the global war against communism. His actions (or inactions) included:

1. Back channel peace talks with Fidel Castro
2. " " Nikita Kruschev
3. Failing to back up the Bay of Pigs invasion
4. Going to war with the CIA, which he vowed to shatter into a thousand pieces, firing Allen Dulles etc
5. Ramming through the Limited Test Ban Treaty over the united opposition of the JCS
6. Rejecting JCS plans for a winnable first strike by 1963 before Soviet nuclear capabilities made this an impossibility.
7. Rejecting JCS chief ***** Lemnitzer's Operation Northwoods
8. Cracking down on use of American bases by Cuban exiles making commando raids on Cuba.
9. Failing to attack Cuba during the Missile Crisis
10. Removing US missiles from Turkey after the crisis as per agreement with Kruschev, thus upsetting the previous status quo, a "win" for the USSR.
11. The American University speech, seen as an offer of peace and a possible end to the Cold War.
12. Willingness to accept a neutral government in Laos (it was believed that without a strong anti-communist leader, Laos would fall to the Reds)
13. Direct orders (ignored or frustrated) to the Pentagon to begin planning for withdrawal of American troops in 1963.
14. Opposition to the Diem coup, which replaced the somewhat recalcitrant leader with generals favorable to CIA and American military control.

So was Kennedy a traitor to the cause of the Cold War? A great statesman and peacemaker? Neither? Discuss.

 

[HoHoBomb]

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/exposure/content/photo/photo/2074542_the-sex-life-of-jfk_4iql2hncl2suvupovkd7wlppxpncurxrbvj6lwuht2ya6mzmafma_610x342.jpg

 

[sigh]

Let's dig him up and hang him. Put the black bag over his head so nobody will notice the bullet hole.

 

[sigh]

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/exposure/content/photo/photo/2074542_the-sex-life-of-jfk_4iql2hncl2suvupovkd7wlppxpncurxrbvj6lwuht2ya6mzmafma_610x342.jpg

Wow. That's a tight dress.

 

[Balladeer08]

Wow. That's a tight dress.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqolSvoWNck

 

[colddiesel]

I think most of your theses are way overblown but with respect to item 10 Krushchev agreed that the withdrawl of missiles in Turkey by the USA would not be published for 3 months after the deal. Thus USSR withdrew alleged missiles from Cuba and USA withdrew actual missiles from Turkey/USSr border.

Kennedy knew the American public had a short attention scan and to this day most Americans do not appreciate the magnitude of the USA's concessions in Turkey. Turkey is an interesting ally, The biggest Army in Europe apart from Russia and yet time and time again the west has let them down. One day , pretty soon I thing the Turks are going to turn their backs on the west and everyone will be so surprised.

Russian sources indicate that they thought the deal was a triumph - for them!.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Russian sources indicate that they thought the deal was a triumph - for them!.

That is my point, sir. The outcome of the Missile Crisis was clearly a change in the status quo in favor of the USSR, at time when the balance of nuclear power hung in the balance.

My question stands. Traitor or statesman?

 

[phrodeau]

That is my point, sir. The outcome of the Missile Crisis was clearly a change in the status quo in favor of the USSR, at time when the balance of nuclear power hung in the balance.

My question stands. Traitor or statesman?

I don't know. I have a short attention scan.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I don't know. I have a short attention scan.

Bang your transponder against a hard object and rejoin the discussion once your scanner reboots.

 

[Harrypalm]

...and you also probably believe the Nazi's didn't have concentration camps.

 

[sigh]

That is my point, sir. The outcome of the Missile Crisis was clearly a change in the status quo in favor of the USSR, at time when the balance of nuclear power hung in the balance.

My question stands. Traitor or statesman?

I don't know. It seems like a pretty even trade to me. No Soviet missiles in Cuba, no American missiles in Turkey. Why is that a win for the USSR?

On top of that, we defused a war that was about to erupt just 80 miles south of Florida. That had to be in our favor.

That said, I'm no student of those days, or that of particular crisis. I'm sure there were other factors involved.

 

[The Greek]

The other factor at play was European influence, especially Germany, where tensions were still high especially around Berlin. The higher goal of the SU was security and political influence in the European theater. At the time, the allied policy of using nuclear deterrent in Europe to hold the more powerful Soviet military in check was in effect. With the elimination of the Turkish missiles, part of that nuclear deterrent was lost. Advantage Soviets.

Having said that, I do not think JFK is a traitor, but was basically outclassed in foreign politics, just like his dad.

 

[The_Trouvere]

rosco rathbone thinks that everyone who disagrees with him about the Cold War is a traitor.

I say after Patrick Henry, "If this be treason, make the most of it."

I believe that after the Second World War a certain amount of tension was probably inevitable between the United States and the Soviet Union. I also believe that the United States overestimated the danger of Communism, and that the United States could have unilaterally reduced tensions with the Soviet Union.

I do not believe that there was a remote chance that the United States would somehow "go Communist." The Soviet Union did not intend to conquer us. The Soviet military did not have the ability. The American Communist Party was preposterously unable to overthrow the U.S. government. What may have happened would have been a nuclear exchange that would probably have been provoked by the United States.

My criticisms of John Kennedy's foreign policy are from the left. His inaugural promise to "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty," articulated the hubris that got us into Vietnam and kept us there long after it should have been obvious that the War was immoral, and that Vietnam was unnecessary to America's security and the U.S. economy.

There never should have been any effort to overthrow or assassinate Castro. Although he was a dictator, I do not see how he was any worse than dictators the United States supported at the time. He was probably more popular.

Kennedy should have ended all support for the South Vietnamese dictatorship. That would have been politically difficult. The Cold War hysteria articulated by the OP was at the time a national psychosis.

 

[rosco rathbone]

rosco rathbone thinks that everyone who disagrees with him about the Cold War is a traitor.

If that were the case, the thread would have been called, JFK: Traitor.

Instead it was called, JFK: Traitor?

I think Kennedy was a fairly centrist Cold Warrior with no more hubris than any other participant in our recent total victory in World War 2. He was influenced towards peace and disarmament by the fact that he was being pushed hard to be the person to start a nuclear holocaust, which would have made him one of history's greatest villains. That has to keep you up at night.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

rosco rathbone thinks that everyone who disagrees with him about the Cold War is a traitor.

I say after Patrick Henry, "If this be treason, make the most of it."

I believe that after the Second World War a certain amount of tension was probably inevitable between the United States and the Soviet Union. I also believe that the United States overestimated the danger of Communism, and that the United States could have unilaterally reduced tensions with the Soviet Union.

I do not believe that there was a remote chance that the United States would somehow "go Communist." The Soviet Union did not intend to conquer us. The Soviet military did not have the ability. The American Communist Party was preposterously unable to overthrow the U.S. government. What may have happened would have been a nuclear exchange that would probably have been provoked by the United States.

My criticisms of John Kennedy's foreign policy are from the left. His inaugural promise to "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty," articulated the hubris that got us into Vietnam and kept us there long after it should have been obvious that the War was immoral, and that Vietnam was unnecessary to America's security and the U.S. economy.

There never should have been any effort to overthrow or assassinate Castro. Although he was a dictator, I do not see how he was any worse than dictators the United States supported at the time. He was probably more popular.

Kennedy should have ended all support for the South Vietnamese dictatorship. That would have been politically difficult. The Cold War hysteria articulated by the OP was at the time a national psychosis.

You obviously misunderstand the context of the threat that existed throughout the Cold War.

At its roots communism and socialism are the philosophical antitheses of free market capitalism, and the Soviet Union (and to a far lesser extent China) was never shy about exporting its governing philosophy to smaller nations whose working classes might very well have been unarguably oppressed by its ruling elites. Soviet financial and military support of home grown revolutionary fervor (or instigation of revolutions where they did not previously exist) was not without its ultimate successes. The spread of communism or socialism, if left unchecked, threatened to isolate free market economies irrespective of their military power.

Moreover, the ability of the Soviet Union and China to field large standing armies numerically superior to the United States could not be dismissed and served to offset other areas where the U. S. and NATO forces might have an arguable advantage.

Nor was the technology gap between East and West a particularly large one. All super powers developed nuclear weapons arsenals within a few years of each other. At the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis both the U. S. and the Soviet Union already had ballistic missile submarines in service which would have diminished the "balance of power" shift the land based missiles supposedly represented -- or at least it would have if anyone had thought to make the argument.

The point is, the economic threat posed by the spread of communism and the relative military parity that at least two communist super powers could claim constituted a fully legitimate threat to Western nations throughout most of the Cold War period.

Having ultimately minimized that threat does not lessen its historical legitimacy simply by viewing it through the distorted lens of hindsight.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The spread of communism or socialism, if left unchecked, threatened to isolate free market economies irrespective of their military power.

How "isolate"? The Commies were usually willing to trade with them.

 

[KingOrfeo]

In his short presidency, John F Kennedy made every attempt to stymie the global war against communism. His actions (or inactions) included:

1. Back channel peace talks with Fidel Castro

Well, why not?

2. " " Nikita Kruschev

" "

3. Failing to back up the Bay of Pigs invasion

What exactly could or should he have done that was not done? I've studied the history of that op. There was no way it could have succeeded.

4. Going to war with the CIA, which he vowed to shatter into a thousand pieces, firing Allen Dulles etc

Considering what came out in the 1970s, obviously he did not go far enough.

5. Ramming through the Limited Test Ban Treaty over the united opposition of the JCS

Why not?

6. Rejecting JCS plans for a winnable first strike by 1963 before Soviet nuclear capabilities made this an impossibility.

I sincerely hope you don't wish that "winnable first strike" thing had ever actually been tried!

7. Rejecting JCS chief ***** Lemnitzer's Operation Northwoods

I should hope he rejected it!

Operation Northwoods was a series of proposals that originated within the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals, which called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit acts of terrorism in US cities and elsewhere, were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[2]

At the time of the proposal, Cuba had recently become communist under Fidel Castro. The operation proposed creating public support for a war against Cuba by blaming it for terrorist acts.[3] To this end, Operation Northwoods proposals recommended hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:

The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.

Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or simulated actions against various US military and civilian targets. The operation recommended developing a "Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".

8. Cracking down on use of American bases by Cuban exiles making commando raids on Cuba.

See response to 3.

9. Failing to attack Cuba during the Missile Crisis

See response to 6.

10. Removing US missiles from Turkey after the crisis as per agreement with Kruschev, thus upsetting the previous status quo, a "win" for the USSR.

A fair deal; each side removed its missiles from the other's back yard.

11. The American University speech, seen as an offer of peace and a possible end to the Cold War.

I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age where great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age where a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.

And that makes sense.

12. Willingness to accept a neutral government in Laos (it was believed that without a strong anti-communist leader, Laos would fall to the Reds)

Eventually it did -- and, outside Laos, it didn't matter. No dominoes.

13. Direct orders (ignored or frustrated) to the Pentagon to begin planning for withdrawal of American troops in 1963.

From Vietnam, you mean? In hindsight, would he had been obeyed!

14. Opposition to the Diem coup, which replaced the somewhat recalcitrant leader with generals favorable to CIA and American military control.

That coup was, you know, a coup. And it involved assassinating Diem. Coups and assassinations are not the sort of things any U.S. government agency should be involved in.

So was Kennedy a traitor to the cause of the Cold War? A great statesman and peacemaker? Neither? Discuss.

Sounds like he was the Only Sane Man keeping a rabid military/intelligence complex in check at least some of the time. We owe him our lives.

 

[Lancecastor]

So was Kennedy a traitor to the cause of the Cold War? A great statesman and peacemaker? Neither? Discuss.

I think it's a sign of the times when Americans who strive for peace are considered potential traitors.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I think it's a sign of the times when Americans who strive for peace are considered potential traitors.

Those times, or these?

 

[ryan8558]

Those times, or these?

Yes..

 

[Colonel Hogan]

How "isolate"? The Commies were usually willing to trade with them.

The Chinese certainly were thanks to the efforts of Kissinger and Nixon, and the Russians were as well after the end of the Cold War, but prior to the normalization of relations with China, the prospect of a future international community dominated by communist nations could have very easily reduced the dependency which many smaller nations had on the resources and wealth of the West.

It was the picture of what a Russian or Chinese victory in the Cold War would have looked like had they been convinced they could win it and chose to go in that direction.