Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Welcome to kingsnake.com's message board system. Here you may share and discuss information with others about your favorite reptile and amphibian related topics such as care and feeding, caging requirements, permits and licenses, and more. Launched in 1997, the kingsnake.com message board system is one of the oldest and largest systems on the internet.

Click here to visit Classifieds
https://www.crepnw.com/
Click here for Dragon Serpents

Disturbing parallel... Don't let your guards down yet...

tethered Feb 02, 2005 01:11 AM

U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote :
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror

by Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times (9/4/1967: p. 2)

WASHINGTON, Sept. 3-- United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here.

Pending more detailed reports, neither the State Department nor the White House would comment on the balloting or the victory of the military candidates, Lieut. Gen. Nguyen Van Thieu, who was running for president, and Premier Nguyen Cao Ky, the candidate for vice president.

A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam. The election was the culmination of a constitutional development that began in January, 1966, to which President Johnson gave his personal commitment when he met Premier Ky and General Thieu, the chief of state, in Honolulu in February.

The purpose of the voting was to give legitimacy to the Saigon Government, which has been founded only on coups and power plays since November, 1963, when President Ngo Dinh Deim was overthrown by a military junta.

Few members of that junta are still around, most having been ousted or exiled in subsequent shifts of power.

Significance Not Diminished

The fact that the backing of the electorate has gone to the generals who have been ruling South Vietnam for the last two years does not, in the Administration's view, diminish the significance of the constitutional step that has been taken.

The hope here is that the new government will be able to maneuver with a confidence and legitimacy long lacking in South Vietnamese politics. That hope could have been dashed either by a small turnout, indicating widespread scorn or a lack of interest in constitutional development, or by the Vietcong's disruption of the balloting.

American officials had hoped for an 80 per cent turnout. That was the figure in the election in September for the Constituent Assembly. Seventy-eight per cent of the registered voters went to the polls in elections for local officials last spring.

Before the results of the presidential election started to come in, the American officials warned that the turnout might be less than 80 per cent because the polling place would be open for two or three hours less than in the election a year ago. The turnout of 83 per cent was a welcome surprise. The turnout in the 1964 United States Presidential election was 62 per cent.

Captured documents and interrogations indicated in the last week a serious concern among Vietcong leaders that a major effort would be required to render the election meaningless. This effort has not succeeded, judging from the reports from Saigon.

NYT. 9/4/1967: p. 2.

Replies (9)

Thane Feb 02, 2005 10:26 AM

I've got a feeling there's a whole lot longer to go than it looks like right now. Bush's goal was/is to stabilize the middle east by forcing democracy in Iraq. The more I study history and terrorism and how it has been used in history, the more I'm thinking the middle east has been DE-stabilized. Hope I'm wrong here.... time will tell. Bush is going to go down in history as a hero or .... something else.
-----
Thane

tethered Feb 02, 2005 01:08 PM

"I've got a feeling there's a whole lot longer to go than it looks like right now. Bush's goal was/is to stabilize the middle east by forcing democracy in Iraq. The more I study history and terrorism and how it has been used in history, the more I'm thinking the middle east has been DE-stabilized. Hope I'm wrong here.... time will tell. Bush is going to go down in history as a hero or .... something else."

Sounds like you're finally coming around to what we've been saying for years! :-P I hope we're all wrong so we can bring our troops home and get rid of this huge expense.

fred albury Feb 02, 2005 02:18 PM

A Series of never-ending wars?

The evidence is so overwhelming that even to those that dont believe, it cant be dismissed. Unsettling for those among us that believe the rhetoric we are fed by the corporate news giants, more of the same for those that have seen similar tactics in other times.

Bring the Troops Home Now

Fred Albury

H+E Stoeckl Feb 02, 2005 08:01 PM

Pulling out the U.S. soldiers now would lead to another disaster.

This would either create even more anarchy and a situation like in Somalia or the vacuum would be filled by islamic fundamentalists and we would have to face a copy of Iran.

Since the U.S. decided to remove Saddam they must do his job now. Saddam was a factor of stability in Iraq. Of course his methods were cruel and he was a murderer. But playing devils advocate one must say the guy contributed to a stable Middle East. He was good for our interests.

In Bavaria (the state of Germany where I am living) we have a saying that is: "Never ever something better succeeds".

tethered Feb 03, 2005 12:04 AM

That saying is downright depressing.

I agree with you, though, that pulling our troops out now would be disasterous. But what if we "stay the course" and find ourselves there 10 years from now w/ a million humans dead? On a pessimistic day, I would say that it's a choice between losing quickly or losing slowly.

More optimistically, the Bush Administration might get their act together and turn the situation around.

fred albury Feb 03, 2005 11:15 AM

We are the SAME person!! LOL

I hear what you are saying, but in some totally selfish nationalistic way...I think it would be better to withdraw the troops now...then risk loseing another American Military life....and injured Americans...as well as killed and maimed IRAQ women, children men...

Unstable? Perhaps...but if the stability is only brought about because of OCCUPATION then it is no stability at all.
And right now IRAQ is far from stable.
And Bush mentioned SYRIA in his lovely address last night....and IRAN.

Sorry guys, but it will take an act of God to convince me of two things:

a)That Bush and the NeoConservatives Monsters that run our government dont suck totally.

b)That OUR troop presence is required in any of these other countries to make this a SAFER world.

Do you feel safer?

I dont.

Sincerely,

Fredrick Albury

Thane Feb 03, 2005 01:09 PM

I'd like to make some suggested reading for you all (maybe some of you have already read these). I've learned a lot from BOTH books.

1. "The enemy within" by micheal savage

2. "Where the right went wrong" by pat buchanon

Yes, what some are calling the neocons aren't helping. Read these, very interesting and informative.
Thanes Place

-----
Thane

H+E Stoeckl Feb 03, 2005 05:32 PM

You are right, Fred. That's a selfish point of view. Nationalistic? Rather not.
This point of view results from the conditions in Germany, France and the Netherlands, just to name a few European countries.

We have a huge amount of muslems here (about 3 millions only in Germany - entire population 80 millions) most of them are from Turkey, Bosnia, Iran, Irak.

Although many of them are here in the second and third generation they refuse to assimilate and even to acclimatize. Berlin is the town with the third-most Turkish inhabitants all over the world. In the towns in Germany they are partly living in ghettos where you can live your life without speaking a single word of the German language.

Several years ago we have got a problem with several hundred Kurds (PKK). They blocked a freeway, attacked police officers and poured petrol over themselves and tried to burn themselves.

It was kind of a civil war for a few days.

About 2 months ago in the Netherlands was a riot (christians vs. muslims) after a muslim critical movie director was killed by muslims.

In my job as a police officer I have learned that these guys are not some to meddle with.

Every conflict christians vs. muslems stirs them up, no matter where it happens.

So I rather prefer to have dictator in Iraq and peace in Germany instead of war in Irak (or Syria, or Iran) and stirred up muslims in Europe.

Remember: We have lots of them in our country and we are not able to keep them out like you guys in the U.S. over the pond.

Selfish point of view? Only human, I would say....

Site Tools