The Worst US President Ever?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

He ended the war sure, but he made some spectacular blunders - most notably the Operation Menu bombings in Cambodia - which led more or less directly to the rise of the Khmer Rouge in that country, and the infamous genocides under Pol Pot. Public school curriculums probably don't teach that either

I hate to fight an old war but you forgot the North Vietnamese were in Cambodia with their supply routes. That's the reason for the bombing. The U.S. supported the Lon Nol anti-communist government. The U.S. bombing ended around 1972 and the communist Pol Pot killed a million Cambodians from 1975-1978. The Democrats killed all support to S. Vietnam and Cambodia in 1975 leading to the killing fields. Neither Pres. Ford or Carter did anything to stop the genocide- Nixon wasn't in power during that period.

What do you mean "I forgot", I didn't really think that Nixon woke up one morning and decided to bomb Cambodia for fun

As for preventing further North Vietnamese offensives, they failed. In May 1969, PAVN/NLF launched an offensive similar in size to that of the mini-Tet offensive of the previous year. It certainly cost North Vietnam the effort and manpower to disperse and camouflage their Cambodian sanctuaries to prevent losses to further air attack. President Nixon claimed the raids were a success, since air power alone had to provide a shield for withdrawal and Vietnamization. They certainly emboldened Nixon to launch the Cambodian Campaign of 1970.[34]

There was no doubt that they also helped set Cambodia on the road to an abyss of violence that Sihanouk had worked for ten years to avoid.[35] While out of the country on 18 March 1970, the prince was deposed by the National Assembly and replaced by Lon Nol. The Nixon administration, although thoroughly aware of the weakness of Lon Nol's forces and loath to commit American military force to the new conflict in any form other than air power, announced its support of the newly-proclaimed Khmer Republic.[36] Cambodia, like neighboring Laos, would be sacrificed in order to buy time for the Republic of Vietnam.[37]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Menu

Perhaps you've forgotten the dubious nature of the operation itself - a covert war conducted against a country that the US wasn't officially at war with, without the knowledge and consent of Congress or the American people.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Paul Daniels

[mendeleev 68]

Interesting link, Paul Daniels. I hadn't lately thought about how Nixon's bombing of Cambodia was the proximate destabilizing factor that led to Khmer Rouge's coming to power.

I've heard it said that Afghanistan is Russian for Vietnam. Given that, is there a language where Pakistan means Cambodia? Obama will have to tread very carefully so that history doesn't repeat itself there, since this time the totalitarian regime would probably be jihadist, might not like American much, and would have 100 nukes.

Edited January 14, 2009 by novotul

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nixon of course was the guy who said that "when the President does it, it isn't illegal", clearly an indicator of the man's arrogance and massive ego.

I dunno about Pakistan but Iraq and Afghanistan are today's Vietnam, pretty much. I suspect the current economic realities will force an end to Bush's wars sooner than many will like. It also means that its very unlikely, short of a major break out of hostilities by one of the other major powers, that we'll see a widening of the war on terror to other countries - like Pakistan or Iran.

No more troops to send, no more money to pay for it and the country is mortgaged up to the hilt.

[NickD 202]

Nixon of course was the guy who said that "when the President does it, it isn't illegal", clearly an indicator of the man's arrogance and massive ego.

I dunno about Pakistan but Iraq and Afghanistan are today's Vietnam, pretty much. I suspect the current economic realities will force an end to Bush's wars sooner than many will like. It also means that its very unlikely, short of a major break out of hostilities by one of the other major powers, that we'll see a widening of the war on terror to other countries - like Pakistan or Iran.

No more troops to send, no more money to pay for it and the country is mortgaged up to the hilt.

Still that same old argument as to whether we are making friends or teeing people off, much as what to do with an apparently corrupt administration. Do we investigate or just move on? Spain sure backed off with one relatively small attack on their nation, and to the best of my knowledge hasn't had problems since.

It wasn't me that teed off the terrorists, was too busy working trying to save enough money to pay my property taxes so I wouldn't lose my finally paid off home. But somebody teed off that handful of terrorists that hit the WTCs'. Was it you?

And did we actually need yet an agency because the agencies we had weren't doing their jobs? How about kicking a$$? No they, (our government, who else) just requests at most, a letter of resignation.

Recall that day like it was yesterday, what was Bush doing in that classroom anyway? Believe he was there pumping those kids on how to read, sits there dumbfounded for seemingly hours then it finally occurs to him, he better find a place to hide.

Still an issue as to whether there was voters fraud in Florida and Ohio, but with two dingbats like Gore and Kerry running against him, another bad joke. Both had the majority even before the primaries hit Wisconsin, so why even vote? But enough Wisconsinites objected so we had our date moved up.

Problem with this country, not enough people screaming, and they should be. Maybe with loss of jobs and homes, they will have more time.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think its about having confidence and accountability in our demmocratically elected government - something that seemed to be missing in both the Nixon and Bush administrations.

Under Nixon - the US conducted a clandestine air-war against Cambodia (we're talking carpet bombing here - not a few odd bombs here and there), dropping more bombs on that country than were dropped in Japan during WW2. This was kept secret from Congress and the American people - and it wasn't until the Clinton years, when documents were declassified that the true scale of the operation became known.

Then we have Bush with his back and forth justifications for war - based on spurious intelligence (evidence that the government knew was spurious, but for policy reasons decided to focus on to the exclusion of anything else).

[NickD 202]

Truman came up with that buck stops here, congress took that too literally and kept on giving the president more and more power to pass that buck. Didn't happen overnight. Yeah, over a million people killed in Cambodia, but what's a million people? Still can't get straight numbers for the number of people killed in Iraq, heard some self proclaim experts say, 3/4 million, so tend to go with that, others say, only 80,000, but isn't one too much? Especially if that one is a very close loved one to you. Only natural to seek revenge, at least not be over delighted about it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Truman came up with that buck stops here, congress took that too literally and kept on giving the president more and more power to pass that buck. Didn't happen overnight. Yeah, over a million people killed in Cambodia, but what's a million people? Still can't get straight numbers for the number of people killed in Iraq, heard some self proclaim experts say, 3/4 million, so tend to go with that, others say, only 80,000, but isn't one too much? Especially if that one is a very close loved one to you. Only natural to seek revenge, at least not be over delighted about it.

Well there are conflicting estimates on the deaths from the bombing itself - but its said to be in the hundreds of thousands.

Nixon was able wash his hands of direct responsiblity of course - but the fact remains that US intervention is in large part responsible for bringing about one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century.

Kennedy wasn't much better in my view, given that his blunders in Cuba resulted in the Cuban Missile Crisis.

[alienlovechild 75]

Under Nixon - the US conducted a clandestine air-war against Cambodia (we're talking carpet bombing here - not a few odd bombs here and there), dropping more bombs on that country than were dropped in Japan during WW2. This was kept secret from Congress and the American people - and it wasn't until the Clinton years, when documents were declassified that the true scale of the operation became known.

It's been recognized for some time if you can't keep out hostile forces, your country becomes open to attack. That's what happened to Belgium in WWI and WWII. They were neutral but got caught in the crossfire and ended up as a battlefield. I think Hauge Convention of 1907 covered that but airpower wasn't an issue then.

With your reasoning that Nixon gave rise to Pol Pot indirectly it could be said the WWI Allies gave rise to Hitler. The Versailles Treaty may be responsible but it hardly absolves Hitler for his actions. In any case, it leads to the same weak defense one often hears from criminals about a poor upbringing leading them to criminal acts.

The extent of the bombing may been declassified in 2000 but most people knew about it long before that- 1971. I knew about and I was 7 years old at the time. I didn't know that the Cambodian government requested the airstrikes and that they so small compared to the rest of Vietnam War- interesting.

"In the United States the bombing of Cambodia became a subject of contention. Although the Nixon administration intended to keep it a secret, journalists quickly broke the story. The bombings became a major object of protest within the antiwar movement, with some labeling the covert operations foolish and others declaring them illegal. A protest against the bombing of Cambodia at Kent State University on 4 May 1970 turned violent, resulting in the death of four students after a National Guard unit, brought in to quiet the protesters, fired into the crowd.

The bombings were devastating to Cambodia's civilian population and proved to be a major source of political instability as well. General Lon Nol's coup in 1970, shortly after the American raids began, displaced Prince Norodom Sihanouk and sent the country into a period of political turmoil. This ultimately resulted in the rise to power of leader Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, a communist political and military group, in 1975.

After the withdrawal of U.S. ground troops from Cambodia on 30 June 1970, tactical air and B-52 strikes continued at the request of the Cambodian government. These missions were approved by Federal Armée National Khmer representatives prior to execution. Air strikes continued, again at the request of the Cambodian government, until the Senate Armed Services Committee held hearings on the bombing operations. After determining that Nixon had improperly conducted such operations in a country that Congress officially recognized as neutral, Congress voted to terminate the bombing—after some thirty-five hundred raids—as of midnight, 14 August 1973. The bombing operations lasted four and one-half years, but they represented only about 1 percent of the total U.S. air activity in the Vietnam War."

http://www.answers.com/topic/cambodia-bombing-of

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

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.

In conversation with Henry Kissinger regarding Vietnam, as quoted in Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. (2002) by Daniel Ellsberg ISBN 0-670-03030-9

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.

In conversation with Henry Kissinger regarding Vietnam, as quoted in Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. (2002) by Daniel Ellsberg

[alienlovechild 75]

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.

In conversation with Henry Kissinger regarding Vietnam, as quoted in Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. (2002) by Daniel Ellsberg ISBN 0-670-03030-9

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.

In conversation with Henry Kissinger regarding Vietnam, as quoted in Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. (2002) by Daniel Ellsberg

Instead we got a million Vietnamese boat people and million dead in Cambodia. BTW, Nixon didn't start that war but he ended it. Will Obama, too, get most of the blame for the war(s) he got stuck with? Probably not, not after the Obama plate collection came out. It would ruin their value. Instread, let's have more movies about Nixon (and Bush) for the next 30 years.

[NickD 202]

My version of JFK that I read about, he was ill advised by his trusted advisers, but had the wisdom to reverse his decision to avert WW III. Also would have been dead shortly if he wasn't assassinated, had a terminal disease.

Hitler is a mystery, whole world knew what was going on, even Ford and DuPont were building plants in Germany, but nobody took the efforts to stop him. But do we really need a defense that is 10% greater than all the other nations combined?

Met some pretty dumb officers in the military that could explain that OD that assumed it was our own B-17's they saw on radar at Pearl Harbor, but never went on to explain why these planes were sighted from the NW when our B-17's were coming from the opposite direction. So much for blind obedience. Nixon got elected to end the war in VN, Johnson really pushed that, word was he was concerned about this military contractor buddies, who do you believe. But took a second term for Nixon to end the war, not quite as quick as he promised. Can only ask, exactly what was accomplished by all that? Feel the answer, is nothing.

And what about the FBI informing the CIA about Arabs wanting to learn how to fly, but not wanting to learn how to land? Arrogance or stupidity, or worse yet, maybe somebody else wanted a war. Your guess is as good as mine.

All I know, quite a difference between wanting a war, can be some nice profits, or having to leave to go fight in one. With the latter, the pay isn't very good, nor was the GI benefits, something about a fire burning up all the records in St. Louis, so no benefits were available. And wouldn't even look at my original records I have safely accumulated. And you may wonder why I do not trust our government.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

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.

In conversation with Henry Kissinger regarding Vietnam, as quoted in Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. (2002) by Daniel Ellsberg ISBN 0-670-03030-9

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.

In conversation with Henry Kissinger regarding Vietnam, as quoted in Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers. (2002) by Daniel Ellsberg

Instead we got a million Vietnamese boat people and million dead in Cambodia. BTW, Nixon didn't start that war but he ended it. Will Obama, too, get most of the blame for the war(s) he got stuck with? Probably not, not after the Obama plate collection came out. It would ruin their value. Instread, let's have more movies about Nixon (and Bush) for the next 30 years.

Well what's your point?

That Nixon gets a raw deal on Watergate because his Vietnam record doesn't get more prominence? That and the guy being an irresponsible nutbag who could (in his words) care less about civilian deaths - an attitude that surely comes into play in regards to his ordering carpet bombing against Cambodia (with disastrous results for that country).

The man had no respect for the idea of checks and balances, and considered executive power as absolute. If Watergate showed anything - it was that Richard Nixon was a law unto himself.

But anyway - why would we need more movies about Nixon? It's Bush's turn - after all, he is the modern equivalent of Nixon (although not as devious as Nixon).

[spookyturtle 9,465]

It's Bush's turn - after all, he is the modern equivalent of Nixon (although not as devious as Nixon).

Nor as intelligent.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's Bush's turn - after all, he is the modern equivalent of Nixon (although not as devious as Nixon).

Nor as intelligent.

Granted.