When the dem congress defunded the Vietnam war they allowed communism to spead thoughout SE Asia allowing Pol Pot to return from exile in France leading to the Khermer Rouge. My girlfriend (who is actually in Cambodia right now) had both of her parents killed by the Khermer Rouge and she had to grow up as an orphan. So you have to be careful about assuming anything if we pull out of Iraq. Regardless about what you think about Bush's forein policy, we are there now and one can never know the true consequences of their actions.

Given that, one would think you could spell Khmer Rouge correctly. But more importantly, you should point the finger at Nixon and Kissinger for paving the way for Pol Pot.

I'm not pointing fingers I'm just saying immediate pull out may not be the best option.
as for the typo, It's getting dark in here so I just turned the light on. Yes it's a CFL

The only thing that brought peace to Vietnam was when America stopped making war there.

I'm not sure the democratic loving people who where in vietnam would call it a "peace". Alot of people were killed because we left and the communists implemented their version of govt, so would you really call it "peace"? After all, the voice of the people was crushed. If that is liberal "peace", give me war any day...

Our pull out from Vietnam did not lead to a domino effect spread of Communism throughtout Asia, that's demonstrably false.

Obviously Cambodia fell to the Khmer Rouge, but that was as much of a result of US destabilization of the region in pursuit of the VC as anything else. We were the ones to first depose Sihanouk. At one point the CIA actually supported the KR.

Either way, it's not like the VC, finished with Vietnam, went on to spread to Cambodia - they hated the KR. The VC didn't invade Cambodia until the KR were firmly in control, and the first thing they did was to root them out of power - arguably almost humanitarian. And they left as quickly as they could. The KR were a solidly Cambodian operation, and closer to a Moonie cult than Soviet or Chinese style international Communism.

give me war any day...

Yeah, you might even enjoy the small of napalm.

The communists did extract a price, and many did die, but I suspect a close analysis of the casualty numbers would indicate that we killed a whole lot more than they did.

The little commies deserved it!!!

If they just would have converted in the first place none of this would have happened.

Just like the ragheads!

. But more importantly, you should point the finger at Nixon and Kissinger for paving the way for Pol Pot.

Posted by nullifidian

If i remember correctly,Nixons pledge when he became president was that he would pull out of Viet Nam before the end of his term.
Which he did if you don`t want to split hairs.
Not to say he didn`t kill a whole bunch before he did though.
By the way Kennedy paved the way for Viet Nam and all its problems.
Can`t please any of you hacks.

rwd

Given that, one would think you could spell Khmer Rouge correctly. But more importantly, you should point the finger at Nixon and Kissinger for paving the way for Pol Pot.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 06:07 PM |

Why did Ronald Reagan still recognise Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge as the official Govt of Cambodia even after the killing fields were known about and the witness accounts available to all.

PS,
I don`t know what world our canadian clown lives in,but i will tell you it ain`t the real one.

spud reminds me of that little organ monkey that jumps around throwing shit at everyone.

Did i ever say how much i hate monkeys.

Its true.

I wished they lived around me because i would dedicate my time trying to eliminate them instead of groundhogs.


rwd

Don't EVER....I said EVER point your finger at my communist idol Pol Pot. But, in this case it did give me the chance to bash Nixon and rightfully point out it was his fault that my idol Pol did what he did in the killing fields. Oh, and I must of forgot to add my admiring praise for Kennedy and Johnson for their fabulous roles in the Vietnam conflict. I so much like Cambodia and Thailand for my visits now too because I've discussed those interests right here one the DR in the past (so you already know why).

NULLandVOID

"Why did Ronald Reagan still recognise Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge as the official Govt of Cambodia even after the killing fields were known about and the witness accounts available to all."

Good question. Reagan was a hypocrite who talked about democracy and supported totalitarianism and dictators.

Rideon, fuck off troll.

"By the way Kennedy paved the way for Viet Nam and all its problems."

Kennedy was an ass. But is was Eisenhower who started the U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia.

Where is TruthHurts....oh it's showing alright.

But, Johnson (who I haven't mentioned yet) did a stellar job.

NULLandVOID

"but I suspect a close analysis of the casualty numbers would indicate that we killed a whole lot more than they did."

Indisputable. Not to mention poisoning an entire generation with Agent Orange.

But, remember POL POT my hero, he done good....real good.

NULLandVOID

"NULLandVOID

Posted by ride_on "

Bring it on, asshole. I'll get you another suspension you lying piece of shit.

Aren't you going to tell me how "lucky" I am that this is only a blog again and how dissapointed you are not to be able to confront me in person? So ya' wanna deny those posts you made (you know which ones----but, deny them if you want)? Funny some DR posters contacted me to say they remembered too. ROFLMAO.

It's pretty clear all politicians screwed them and my girlfriend over.

But, Shirts just remember that Pol Pot had nothing to do with it....it was all Eisenhower, Nixon, Kissinger (their fault for what the idol Pol did). Why can't you listen more carefully to what NULLandVOID says?

You forgot Reagan too!

NULLandVOID

Absolutely correct, Shirts.

"Funny some DR posters contacted me to say they remembered too. ROFLMAO."

Remembered what, asshole? Bring it.

But is was Eisenhower who started the U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia.
Posted by nullifidian


Come on Null-Nuts. Everybody knows it was Johnson who was responsible for the gigantic escalation and under whose watch the most Americans died. Ike and JFK were in it and Tricky Dick and his Siamese twin Kissinger up to their necks but somehow Johnson always seems to avoid being identified as The Butcher of Vietnam. It's because of revisionists like you.

Get off your partisan horse for a second or at least go sidesaddle.

....the thing that you are free to deny at anytime.....so go ahead and deny it. While you're at it deny when you said how "lucky" I am that this is a blog and not an in person discussion.

SPUD - My Lai was a horrific crime and should never be excused. Abu Ghraib was bad and also not to be excused, but NOT in the same category.

"Get off your partisan horse for a second or at least go sidesaddle."

I'm not being partisan at all. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon were all responsible. I've never said anything to the contrary. Maybe you look at the world from partisan lenses, but I don't.

"....the thing that you are free to deny at anytime....."

What thing? Spell it out, coward.

Mr Fair, NULLandVOID will first need to spend more time stating that POL POT was not at fault for the killing fields....that was America....let him bask in thinking it Eisenhower, Nixon, Kissinger (and oh yeah Reagan too). No mention can be made of Johnson...how dare you. It makes him happy (and is amusing for us to watch as well).

"and is amusing for us to watch as well"

Us? You don't speak for anybody but your cowardly little self, troll.

NULLandVOID, why did you tell me how "lucky" it was for me that a discussion we were having on the DR wasn't being had in person? I don't understand why that was so "lucky" for me.....

IT's US....for sure....it's US.

"....the thing that you are free to deny at anytime....."

What thing? Spell it out, coward.

Posted by nullifidian

Come on, coward. Spell it out. What are you, chicken?
Bwack! Bwack! Bwack!

Why does Johnson's incredible pile of shit somehow get ignored or reported as smelling like a rose? Hell, even St. John (F. Kennedy) gets tagged regularly by Left and Right. But Johnson? (crickets)

Who is apologizing for Lyndon Johnson? Certainly isn't me.

NULLandVOID, why did you tell me how "lucky" it was for me that a discussion we were having on the DR wasn't being had in person? I don't understand why that was so "lucky" for me.....

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 08:04 PM | Reply

Just answer.

Bwack! Bwack! Bwack!

my arse..

chss.montclair.edu

www.ibiblio.org



Posted by AndreaMackris at 2008-03-15 08:18 PM | Reply | Flag

Awww yes, "arse". You've just defined what everyone knows about NULLandVOID.

"Just answer."

I'll answer after you spell out "the thing," coward.

I'm not being partisan at all. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon were all responsible. I've never said anything to the contrary. Maybe you look at the world from partisan lenses, but I don't.
Posted by nullifidian


I mentioned all the same names in my post, Johnny. I'm the one who brought in Johnson, not you.

What about Carter's involvment with PolPot? Humanitarian agenda my arse..
hss.montclair.edu
www.ibiblio.org
Posted by AndreaMackris


Thanks Andrea. Nice going peanut-breath Jimmy.

Do you have a point, Mr "fair"?

NULLandVOID, why did you tell me how "lucky" it was for me that a discussion we were having on the DR wasn't being had in person? I don't understand why that was so "lucky" for me.....

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 08:04 PM | Reply

Just answer.

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 08:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

There it is again......then we'll go from there.

"chss.montclair.edu"

What's your point?

Johnny....you might have meant Jonah

"Carter secretly supported the genocidal Pol Pot government ousted by Vietnam in 1979. This secret support was essential to further punishment of Vietnam for having successfully defended her own population against the American invaders. US Indochina strategy also intended to outflank the Vietnamese, who were aligned with the Soviet Union, and to back the Pol Pot forces, aligned with China."

Even if this was true, which I doubt, so what? Pol Pot came into power as a result of Nixon's subversion of Cambodia.

Do you have a point, Mr "fair"?
Posted by nullifidian


Yes Null - try and focus. My last 5 or so posts about Johnson, et al deal directly with your post of 7:36:


"Kennedy was an ass. But is was Eisenhower who started the U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia."
Posted by nullifidian

Yeah, Johnson was an ass. So fucking what??? I never said anything different! Is it possible for you to see anything other than from the prism of Democratic/Republican lenses?

.....yep prior to your post pointing out it was Nixon and Kissinger's fault....not Pol Pot's...YOU ARE AN ARSE.

NULLandVOID, why did you tell me how "lucky" it was for me that a discussion we were having on the DR wasn't being had in person? I don't understand why that was so "lucky" for me.....

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 08:04 PM | Reply

Just answer.

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 08:18 PM | Reply | Flag:


Don't want to answer?.....hmmmmmmm.......

Good question. Reagan was a hypocrite who talked about democracy and supported totalitarianism and dictators." - Nulli,

What do you mean you dont see things through partisan lenses, liar...;-) If Reagan was involved don't you think Carter had his hand in it?

What about Carter's involvment with PolPot? Humanitarian agenda my arse..

chss.montclair.edu

www.ibiblio.org

Posted by AndreaMackris at 2008-03-15 08:18 PM

Kinda of different when you have the true facts of what was happening in the Killing fields and then ignore them. I was also Bush 1 who ignored them and happily supported The Khmer Rouge puppet in the UN.

Thank you Vietnam.

Mind you the Chinese though they could smash Vietname and invaded but after heavy losses they left.

Don't want to answer?.....hmmmmmmm.......

Posted by ride_on

Bwack! Bwack! Bwack!

Yeah, Johnson was an ass. So fucking what??? I never said anything different! Is it possible for you to see anything other than from the prism of Democratic/Republican lenses?
Posted by nullifidian


Null - why try to pin it on Ike, neglecting to mention the role of Johnson, The Butcher of Indochina? Do you see how that might come across as partisan? I was merely mentioning all the players - before you finally came around to doing so.

"What about Carter's involvment with PolPot? Humanitarian agenda my arse.."

The Khmer Rouge came to power before Carter took office. Fact. What Carter's policy was is irrelevant to that fact.

So, what, exactly, is inaccurate about: "Kennedy was an ass. But is was Eisenhower who started the U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia.
Posted by nullifidian"?
It was Ike that committed US resources to resisting the Viet Minh after the French got their asses handed to them at Dien Bien Phu in '54.

I get it....rather than answer....you simply


"Bwack! Bwack! Bwack!

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 08:40 PM | Reply | Flag:"

Got it! To be expected from you big mouth.

"Null - why try to pin it on Ike, neglecting to mention the role of Johnson, "

I didn't try to pin it on Ike. I stated the indisputable fact that U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia started in the Eisenhower administration. Where did I ever say that subsequent administrations were not to blame? I didn't support Johnson. I supported Eugene McCarthy and then Kennedy in 1968.

"What about Carter's involvment with PolPot? Humanitarian agenda my arse.."

The Khmer Rouge came to power before Carter took office. Fact. What Carter's policy was is irrelevant to that fact.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 08:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

If that's the case then why did you bring up Reagan...who is even after Carter. NULLandVOID indeed!!!!

"Got it! To be expected from you big mouth."

Still waiting for you spell out "the thing," coward.

"Null - why try to pin it on Ike, neglecting to mention the role of Johnson, "

I didn't try to pin it on Ike. I stated the indisputable fact that U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia started in the Eisenhower administration. Where did I ever say that subsequent administrations were not to blame? I didn't support Johnson. I supported Eugene McCarthy and then Kennedy in 1968.

Posted by nullifidian


Alright then.

America is not securing victories becaues we are hamstringing ourselves with PC crap. War is for killing and survival. Making up and abiding by rules that compromise your ability to destroy your enemy impedes your efficiency.

The only thing "wrong" about Abu Ghraib is that we were concerned about it, and "humanized" our enemies. The last wars where we prevailed, or where we even managed to obtain a stalemate, were WWII and Korea. We weren't concerned with how or where we destroyed the enemy or collateral damage.

War is Hell. Let the Devil take the hindmost. Huamnitarian objectives are not part of the equation. If you start including superfluous considerations, you lose.

When I was in the army, we would stand on a parade field and respond repeatedly in chorus to the question, "What is the mission of the artillery?" Rifle in the air, we'd respond, "Kill. Kill." It was an unabashed recognition of what armed forces are about.

But the introduction of distracting considerations just results in our sustaining greater casualties, and placing obstacles to securing victory.

If we're going to fight, then do it. If not, don't send men to war. We could have cleaned out the al-Qaida and insurgents in a month. There would have been desolation, and many civilian casualties, and destroyed infrastructure, but we would have pacified the country. And there would be little objection to our getting oil in return. We would have conditioned the response.

The reconstruction of Iraq would have come from oil revenues, not the American taxpayer. We would have "loaned" them the money, and they would be repaying us with oil revenues.

But since we've adopted a nihilist deconstructionist ideology, we have weakened ourselves as we question every action under "standards" contrived every which way.

The mission of the military should be "Kill the dehumanized bastards." And collect the spoils of war, rather than making outlays. The Roman Empire lasted so long because they benefited from their undertakings.

As a young male adult who was not drafted into the Viet Nam War, I find those who try to justify this action at My Lai disgraceful. These soldiers who represents the United States Murdered hundreds of women and children for no other reason than they were mad an wanted to hurt someone, anyone.

"MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG", died on that day. Make no mistake WAR IS HELL, that is why it should be the absolute last resort!!! The fact the Vietnamese people for the most part have forgiven the American people for that atroticy says more about those people than the Americans who think that what happened that day to the vietnamese was what they deserved.

WHAT A FUCKING DISGRACE!!!!!!

Celisary - shadow boxing again? Who the fuck in here is justifying My Lai ?

FOR YOU FUCKING IDIOTS THAT ARE TRYING TO CHANGE HISTORY, REMEMBER IT WAS NIXON THAT STARTED THE BOMBING IN CAMBODIA AN GOT THAT COUNTRY IN THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL TO WHAT ULTIMATELY HAPPEN THERE. AN HE LIED TO THE COUNTRY ABOUT THAT BOMBING. LEARN YOUR FUCKING HISTORY BEFORE YOU START BLAMING ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION!!!!!

POL POT is absolved....the killing fields were all Nixon's fault. You may go back to bowing to the idol POL POT.

Hey Alexis, when I had my little vacation only two people came to NULLandVOID's defense (I don't think the other poster was aware of the O'Crap'O's original comments....maybe you are....I don't know). More DR posters than that got in touch with me and they remembered the original conversation that O'Crap'O' was involved in as well (they thanked me for calling the creep out). If that is what you want to come to the defense of, so be it. Now, I'm beginning to understand why he told me I am so "lucky" that this is only a blog and not in person. But, I won't be intimidated....especially by someone like that and someone that makes threats.

What about Carter's involvment with PolPot? Humanitarian agenda my arse.."

The Khmer Rouge came to power before Carter took office. Fact. What Carter's policy was is irrelevant to that fact.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 08:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

If that's the case then why did you bring up Reagan...who is even after Carter. NULLandVOID indeed!!!!

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 08:47 PM

I brought up Reagan and his willingness to support the KR even after they were proven to be babarians. Bush 1 was no better.

"More DR posters than that got in touch with me and they remembered the original conversation that O'Crap'O' "

You're a lying piece of shit. No DR posters contacted you. Show us the emails. Produce those "conversations" or shut the fuck up.

Ride on- there's a reason your comments got dumped, and I could give a rats ass how many other professional DR trolls emailed you.

WOB.

Good thing that some people on here do "give a rats ass" about that subject. NULLandVOID, how do you propose that you have me "shut the fuck up". Is that what I'm supposed to feel "lucky" about?

Bwack! Bwack! Bwack! Fucking lily livered chickenshit. Why don't you mention "the thing," coward?

Celisary - don't pop a vein please? Of course Nixon bombed Cambodia and lied about it.

But please answer the question: who the fuck is justifying My Lai in here?

Show us the emails from "DR posters" chicken.

Let's get you on the record here....what were you referring to when you told me I was "lucky" this is a blog and not a live discussion?

Why don't you just go ahead and deny the other as well. Hmmmmm?

"Why don't you just go ahead and deny the other as well. "

Deny what, coward?

Deny what, coward?

Still waiting for an answer, chickenshit.

You're lucky you can hide behind a monitor, you little coward.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-02-26 10:39 PM | Reply

Hey, explain why I'm "lucky" O'Crap'O'....I don't understand why that is? So if I wasn't behind a monitor...........? What's your point O'Crap'O? ROFLMAO.

I want to know why when we're having a discussion on a blog that you say I'm "lucky" to be behind a monitor? Why is that O'Crap'O'.....you got some splainin' to do.

Posted by ride_on at 2008-03-15 09:39 PM | Reply | Flag: Coward

Guess you can't deny that you've said that I'm "lucky" anymore hey.....cause anyone can go back and check that archive. Now want to deny anything else too?

I see you are NOT going to answer. That is your whole mode anyway. One last time for you to fess up.....why am I "lucky"?

"Hey, explain why I'm "lucky" "

Post your home address and I'll explain it to you in person, coward.

One last time for you to fess up.....why am I "lucky"?


You're lucky to be alive given that it took you 3 years to learn how to breathe. Moron.

Posted by celisary at 2008-03-15 09:11 PM

As a young male adult who was not drafted into the Viet Nam War,

...

WHAT A FUCKING DISGRACE!!!!!!

Post your home address and I'll explain it to you in person, coward.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 10:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Before I would post it for you....I would think you should elaborate. I think the MAJORITY of the people on the DR would agree with me (oh, a few won't, but that's ok).

Someone has to do the heavy lifting in war, and it certainly is not the academics, who are protected by those they consider beneath them.

Maybe Chairman Mao had the right idea about reinvigorating belief in country and patriotic endeavor by putting those slackers back on the line so that they can realize what work is.

"Before I would post it for you...."

In other words, you're a coward. Thanks for the confirmation.

You folks eat meat but are disdainful of those who work in the slaughterhouse.

So let's see here. You have a problem with someone on a blog and you tell that person they are "lucky" to be behind a monitor. Then you ask for that persons home address while you call that person a coward. What is the purpose for you to have my home address? What's your point? WE'RE WAITING.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 10:10 PM

Post your home address and I'll explain it to you in person, coward.

"WE'RE WAITING."

No. You mean *you* are waiting. I'm waiting for you to spell out "the thing" that I'm supposedly denying.

Come on chickenshit. Bring it.

"Why don't YOU post YOUR address and challenge HIM to come over in person?"

Because I'm not the moron making accusations, jackass.

You're waiting for my home address so you can splain' something to me in person. I've asked you to elaborate before I would give out my home address. WE'RE STILL WAITING. What is the purpose for you to have my home address? What's your point? WE'RE WAITING.....WAITING.........

WE'RE STILL WAITING

You have a mouse in your pocket, coward?

Still waiting for you to explain "that thing". What's the matter, chickenshit? You afraid of getting suspended again?

Because I'm not the moron making accusations, jackass.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 10:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well the question is simple....you posted this:

You're lucky you can hide behind a monitor, you little coward.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-02-26 10:39 PM | Reply

Now you want my home address after I asked you why I'm "lucky". It requires some elaboration on your part. WE'RE WAITING.

I'm done with you, chickenshit.

You should be after making threats and requesting my address you freak.

Nullifidian was correct throughout the thread.

It's a shame that moron Ride_on showed up. It was a decent thread.

Thanks, Sarge and Yav. It could have been a good discussion. But then a troll showed up to derail it. Too bad there isn't a moderator on the Drudge Retort.

Too bad there isn't a moderator on the Drudge Retort.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-03-15 11:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

No kidding. It's why I haven't been on here much lately. One idiot is allowed to continue implying that another poster a child molestor without any punishment.

If you guys had real jobs and contributed to the economy instead of blogging and having your little cat fights we could have some meaningful debates.

Time for bed, good-night

Maybe Chairman Mao had the right idea about reinvigorating belief in country and patriotic endeavor by putting those slackers back on the line so that they can realize what work is.

Posted by Johnson at 2008-03-15 10:14 PM

Mao only had belief in himself the country was irrelevant, 10 - 20 million dead who cared not he.

He hid away during WW2 and let the nationalists fight the Japanese.

Oh, that's cute RCADE. You dump one of my comments on this thread, but let ride_on continue to imply that bill is a child molestor.

Fuck this website and it's lack of moderation.

Fuck this website and it's lack of moderation.

Posted by Alexandrite


Peace out bitch...

Hey Rude_Boy, Ride_On, Limp_Wrist, whatever the fuck your handle is -

Can you guess? Can you?? Can you???

What ended the war in Vietnam was the draft and also the fact that eventually everyone had a relative or personally knew a veteran or someone who was either killed or wounded in the war. There is no such involvement for ordinary citizens in the Forever War in Iraq. 4,000 dead American soldiers? 40,000 wounded? Peanuts. Child's play.

"Child's play."

This time it will be the expense. This country simply can't afford the war.

"This country simply can't afford the war."

If each of the 62 million Americans that voted for Bush started writing $200 checks every month to the US Treasury (or skip the middle man and send them directly to China), we COULD afford the $12 BILLION monthly bill!

From Mai Lai to My Lie-the Circle of Life that created and destroyed Colin Powell.

I wonder when the American media will celebrate anniversaries of America's successes instead of reveling in its failures.

Which of Bush's successes do you think we should celebrate?