>Nixon: I still think we ought to take the North Vietnamese dikes out now. Will that drown people?
>Kissinger: About two hundred thousand people.
>Nixon: No, no, no, I'd rather use the nuclear bomb. Have you got that, Henry?
>Kissinger: That, I think, would just be too much.
>Nixon: The nuclear bomb, does that bother you?. I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christsakes.
>Nixon: The only place where you and I disagree is with regard to the bombing. You're so goddamned concerned about civilians and I don't give a damn. I don't care.
>Kissinger: I'm concerned about the civilians because I don't want the world to be mobilized against you as a butcher.
Was Nixon losing it?
No. Nuclear is the way to go.
>>69295483
Better dead than red
Nixon was God tier.
>>69295781
Then I guess you should kill yourself, leaf.
>>69295483
Fuck commies
>>69296022
good one
He was right on the money.
I had no idea Nixon was this awesome. Too bad he let his advisors turn him soft. Looks like he could have saved Vietnam.
>>69295483
He was wrong.
Should have nuked China while there was still time left to do so and get away with it.
faggot beta male jew henry kissinger lost us Vietnam
THIS THREAD IS NOW ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE USA NUKED SAIGON.
Nixon lost it before he was even in office.
>>69295483
Jesus, I guess lgbt rights have come a long way.
We really should have used nukes more
Now there is a big stigma about them
Any President that is unwilling to use nuclear weapons to defeat our enemies if it comes to that is not fit to Commander-in-Chief of this nation.
>>69297019
Hanoi maybe?
>>69297331
Oh you.
>>69297300
thats true for the secretary of state too
>>69297545
and if someone attacks us with a nuke first? then what cuck?
>>69295974
this.
>>69297811
Then we retaliate with our own nukes. We end their peoplehood's existence on this planet.
What kind of a pussy are you? Get your shit together.
>>69297497
The plan of the Eisenhower administration was that we would inevitably nuke everybody. JFK fucked it up.
>>69297019
>nuking our allies
>>69295974
>>69297937
Nixon was a Jew slave, he literally had worm tongue Kissinger whispering in his ear and controlling him like a little puppet.
Just got done reading Dick and Ike pretty good book, I really feel like we started on a downward trend after Nixon got cheated in 1960.
>>69297811
Read up on Mutually Assured Destruction. It's why nuclear nations don't go to war against each other. The game is rigged so everybody loses but in this case anybody except the US, Russia and maybe China gets glassed back to the stone age if they make that mistake. Only the US and Russia really have MAD, the Chinese have something like 400 nukes which is a strong deterrent but not quite MAD capable by treaty and choice.
>>69295483
Nuclear energy is safe so why not?
>>69295483
>Was Nixon losing it?
No Kissinger was just a kike fag.
>>69298846
IIUC though, it's the US that really pushed that idea (and spread the belief that the resulting nuclear winter would be unlivable). The soviets had somewhat of a defensive strategy inplace and would have tried to survive it (maybe it was just a bluff though and they knew it was pointless). The US focused on maximum retaliation.
>>69299594
We outnumbered them in nukes 20:1 during the cuban missile crisis.
>>69299031
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD593z4kzXU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbFzpq343s8
>>69299965
Nixon the drunk.
He's right about the Jews. And probably everything else too.
Googling "nixon trump" makes me so happy.
>>69296986
>Well, you can just stop and think of what could happen if anybody with a decent system of government got control of that mainland. Good God. There'd be no power in the world that could even—I mean, you put 800 million Chinese to work under a decent system and they will be the leaders of the world
I wonder what his plan was concerning China.
>>69300949
Making sure they never get a decent system of government?
>>69295483
>Was Nixon losing it?
No, he knew what it would take to end the war. Everyone knew what it was going to take, but the previous admins were too pussy to do anything about it. Nixon was also a WW2 vet, where civilian bombing was not only allowed, it was fucking condoned. When two governments go to war, the civilians those government are implicitly combatants through complicit actions. The whole "Thou shalt not hurt civilians" line is kikery.
>>69299965
Can't say I disagree with anything he said there.
>>69297019
damn it anon...
>>69301325
As far as development goes, it seems they're getting closer to that every day.
>>69295483
He should've nuked it desu. Fuck communism
>>69300949
probably figured a powerful china is a bigger threat to the soviet union than to us, if they ever got their shit together. he didnt count on the soviet union collapsing 20 years later.
>>69301379
We killed 3 million Vietnamese, raped their women, razed their jungles and their cities to the ground, and destroyed their offspring to the modern day with chemical weapons.
Kissinger and all the hardliner warmongering Jew fucks who have always pulled the strings showed no mercy to civilians. They were convinced we could kill enough people and take home a victory.
JFK was going to end the war in his second term but he was shot. LBJ continued the war and left the presidency in disgrace because it was so retarded. Robert Kennedy ran for president and was shot (coincidence?). Nixon ran with the policy that he would end the war, but didn't.
Civilians are never spared. They suffer the most.
Now the US can afford to pick and choose a bit with its technological mastery.
>>69302916
>JFK was going to end the war in his second term but he was shot.
Considering overt military involvement didn't begin until years after JFK was shot and the rest of your post is bullshit, I'd say you can go ahead a suck a giant Rankean cock you counter-factual faggot.
>>69303038
LBJ put many more troops on the ground because he was a moron.
JFK's presidency was continually undermined by the warmongers from Eisenhower's administration and he was suspicious of Vietnam. He sent one of his cabinet members there, who went in objective but came back calling it a shitshow. JFK knew he wouldn't get reelected if he withdrew from Nam so he said privately he would wait until his second term.
But please, more blatant denial of facts from the bluepill.
>>69303429
>JFK knew he wouldn't get reelected if he withdrew from Nam
Withdrew what from Nam? The whole 500 military advisors? You realize that actual troop involvement didn't begin until '65, correct? Once again: Please eat a giant Rankean dick, you counter-factual faggot.
>>69295483
It's the only way to beat the asians tb.h. They're tough. We killed a lot while we were there, but we didn't break them.
![IMG_5586_thumb[5].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Tw47nea.jpg "IMG_5586_thumb[5].jpg")
>>69303038
https://www.bostonreview.net/us/galbraith-exit-strategy-vietnam
https://mattsteinglass.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/vietnam-war-killed-38-million-vietnamese-not-21-million/
Image is one of the agent orange abominations.
God bless Nixon if only he supported segregation to
>>69303719
>https://www.bostonreview.net/us/galbraith-exit-strategy-vietnam
17,000 US military personnel stationed in Vietnam in 63.
>>69303941
>/vietnam-war-killed-38-million-
kek, there were only 30 million people in the country at the start of the war
>>69304149
>https://mattsteinglass.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/vietnam-war-killed-38-million-vietnamese-not-21-million/
3.8 you imbecile
>>69303941
>first post contradicts what you have to say
>unironically citing word press
Raus.
>>69304067
My bad, 17,000 logistic and advisory personnel. Meanwhile, no actual troop involvement until '65, two years after Kennedy's death. Raus, pinko faggot.
>>69304269
I'm not going to find sparkling jewel sources for you when all you're doing is shitposting.
I didn't contradict myself.
>>69303429
JFK didn't put actual combat ready soldiers in Vietnam.
His guys were considered humanitarian even by Vietcong standards. They didn't start attacking US personnel until LBJ started sending combat ready ships/troops to Vietnam.
Anyone who tries to pin LBJ's war on Kennedy is a fucking delusional faggot.
>>69303941
HOLY SHIT IT'S BRUNO MARS
>>69297811
Reading comprehension
>>69304246
word press you imbecile
Also nowhere did I say anything about troops being on the ground. That is just you flailing around.
I said Kennedy was going to end the war before it became a national embarrassment and I was right.
LBJ and Nixon fell in line with Washington and were shitty presidents.
>>69304500
is he a dwarf?
>>69296022
>>69297811
>>69298688
>>69299744
>>69302699
>>69303777
>>69304466
>>69304500
checked
>>69295974
Nixon still *is* God Tier
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2015/07/29/if-richard-nixon-were-alive-today-this-is-how-he-would-tweet/
We probably disgust him though
>>69304573
http://faculty.washington.edu/charles/pubs/VietnameseCasualtiesDuringAmerican.pdf
First page.
>>69304480
Irrelevant, not my argument. JFK knew better. LBJ and Nixon were pieces of shit.
>>69304466
>Kennedy was going to leave Vietnam!
>Certainly, most Vietnam historians have said “no”—or would have if they considered the question worth posing. They have asserted continuity between Kennedy’s policy and Lyndon Johnson’s, while usually claiming that neither president liked the war and also that Kennedy especially had expressed to friends his desire to get out sometime after the 1964 election
>The alternative would have been to withdraw the troops while acknowledging failure. And this, Newman argues, Kennedy was prepared to do if it became necessary
>if it became necessary
Raus.
>I'm not going to find sparkling jewel sources for you when all you're doing is shitposting
Because they don't fucking exist. Source criticism isn't shit posting. The only shit posting is being done by you, using counterfactual history to claim something while citing wordpress.
so why didn't they bomb the dams?
>>69304836
>LBJ and Nixon were pieces of shit.
Nixon was a piece of shit for not just pulling out of a war he inherited and giving the country away? Are you retarded?
>>69304616
>end the war
It wasn't his to end. All he could do was stop sending supplies/guidance to Vietnam. The fighting would continue as it was a civil war, until LBJ came along.
JFK did however believe in letting Vietnamese people decide for themselves.
>"I dont think the war against populist support can be won out there, Its their war"
>"they're the ones who have to win it or lose it."
JFK in 1963 with 16,700 US personnel aiding S Vietnam
>>69305135
Whether or not Nixon was a piece of shit is not debatable.
A video of Nixon lying for you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx3rt9IYtUM
>>69304881
OK, if you want to ignore the testaments of Kennedy's cabinet and cite some nebulous, anonymous historians more power to you. You've failed to make any kind of serious argument.
>>69305347
Wherein did he lie?
>>69305164
Ok. End American involvement in Vietnam.
South Vietnam was a puppet government of the US anyway.
>>69305620
Can bring a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
>>69305781
Again, wherein did he lie? He promised to end it, he never said the end would be peaceful. In fact, he said he would end it with "honor."
>>69304926
None of your dam business Diego
>>69297300
No, he was great.
Nixon was hated at the end of his presidency. Tricky Dicky. He was epitome of an oily sleazebag. And that's how he was portrayed,"my fellow Americans ..", rubbing his hands and lying. He wasn't a very likeable guy.
>69305931
You must have a very liberal view of the English language.
War continued for seven more years, with American casualties increasing more rapidly. Eventually we withdrew in disgrace anyway. If you call that an honorable end then I need some of what you're smoking.
Did "vietnamization" piss of TPTB and that's why they got him caught doing what everyone else was going?
>>69299965
Kek, that's good shit.
>the Jews are born spies
But now it's offensive
>>69302916
They're just gooks dude, calm down. There's billions of them. Too many of them really.
>>69306323
As if he could foresee the idiotic press coverage of that war and the watergate scandal
>>69296022
t. Alberto Barbosa
