We have been incredibly bored at work lately so I have been bringing DVD's in and watching them on my laptop to pass time. I watched the movie JFK yesterday for the 100th time and everytime I see it I find some new twist. In this movie, they say that the reason JFK was assasinated was because he was going to pull our troops out of Vietnam. A bunch of old (yet powerful) guys didnt like this idea because it was going to lose a lot of money for military contractors. There was also some footage from JFK that said something to the effect of "This is their war and they will have to win it." I believe that JFK wanted to help the Vietnamese but that he didnt want the US fighting the war for them. As everyone knows, as soon as Johnson was sworn in as president, he continued the fight with Vietnam. That being said, I have been a Bush supporter and still support (but also queston) how he leads and I see a lot of correlation between what happened in Vietnam and what is happening now. I have always believed that we should fight for our freedom and against anyone that tries to ruin our way of life (i.e. terrorists). I also have believed that we should not be the worlds police and shouldnt fight everyones battles for them. It isnt our job nor our responsibility nor do I believe that most of the world wants us jumping in to everything that happens. I am also starting think that perhaps we (the american people) are being taken advantage of by our government because I believe in the end everything comes down to money. I think that there are a lot of military contractors and also businesses that will help in the rebuilding process that stand to make a whole lot of money. I think that perhaps at first when 9/11 happened, the administration wanted to do the right thing but after a while, the being pissed off wore off and they began to see the war as an opportunity. Now I may be rambling on and I also do not know all of the facts but I would be interested in what you guys think of this (the correlation between Vietnam and Iraq). I would also be interested in what you think of the JFK conspiracy and the governments motives of the war with Iraq.
There is an absolute parallel. All you have to do is look at the money being made by Halliburton and by defense contractors via the war in Iraq. It is a shameful standard operating procedure.
This has to be the most ridiculous argument of all time. Uh, yeah, let's start a war so that the company that the Vice President used to work for gets money. Yeah, that's it. The liberals' desperation continues to amaze.
The reasons used to justify the war in Iraq have so far shown to be a wee bit less than accurate. Prove me wrong, T_J. I double-dog dare you!
Of course, you probably shouldn't use a factually challenged (and admittedly fictional) movie like JFK to shape too much of your historical view. It takes at least two people to make a conspiracy.
Nice post, Master Baiter. Putting aside the movie and comparisons to JFK and Vietnam, I thought your argument about the morphing of the Bush war on terrorism (regarding Iraq) into a grab bag for American corporate interests very compelling. How much of that is true will come out in the end. We'll have to wait and see. You should post more often.
I'm not saying that we should base our view of history on this movie but I think that there is plenty of evidence to support a conspiracy. I wish I had more time to post about this and I will tomorrow. Gotta go home.
There is a massive amount of evidence to support the idea that there wasn't a conspiracy. And a good deal of material that the Kennedy Assassination buffs have presented as evidence has turned out to be, on further investigation, false. We can't know the answer, but there is arguably more evidence to support the idea of Oswald acting alone as there is to support a conspiracy to assassinate the President. I've seen what the conspiracy buffs have to offer. I've seen their conclusions debunked. I've seen their evidence torn apart. I've seen some assassination buffs employ a very liberal use of facts to make a false conclusion. It's clear that arguing the facts are useless as facts have not managed to end the assassination conspiracy industry which continues to thrive despite all the evidence against it. Because no matter what happens, no matter what evidence comes out to dispute whatever conspiracy theory gets trotted out, one can never prove the negative. No one can prove their wasn't a conspiracy even though the bulk of the evidence supports that conclusion. Since there is no certainty, we have to acknowlege that the possibility that there was a conspiracy exists and just continue to attempt to tear down whatever theory gets propped up next week. So, I will not attempt to change your mind, and you might as well not attempt to change mine. The evidence says to me there was no conspiracy. You can continue to choose to interpret things differently. Anything else is a waste of time and effort.
jfk was historically based FICTION. i havent watched the movie recently, but there are many factual errors contained in there that many take as fact. to your point that jfk was trying to get out of nam and thats why he was killed, that is not true. there is no evidence that kennedy was pulling out of viet nam. he was the one who brought troops in there in the first place. under eisenhower we had a military advisory board in nam, but no fighting troops. ike was under pressure to send troops in, but being the bad-ass general that he was he was not one to be pressured by the pentagon. it wasnt untill jfk came into office that u.s. troops were deployed into the area. jfk was a real weenie when it came to standing up to the military. he just couldnt say no. for the record, i dont believe that oswald acted alone. i think that the mob was involved. rfk, the attorney general was really going after the mob. jack ruby, who killed oswald had heavy mob ties.
