Bashing Ayn Rand

[peach174]

The Vietnam war lasted from
1 November 1955– 30 April 1975

Lyndon Johnson Begin sending US Troops in 1963.

Actual History of the Vietnam War;

Americans were sent to Vietnam in September, 1950, by President Truman as military advisers to the French who were fighting to maintain their power in Vietnam. After the French were defeated and left Vietnam in 1954, a power vacuum developed that eventually pitted north against south, the American advisers stayed on as advisers to South Vietnamese military groups. As the problems between the north and the south heated up, more American advisers were sent to Vietnam. These advisers could carry side-arms but, when the Vietnamese army units they were assigned to were fired on, the Americans weren't allowed to return fire. Americans began to be wounded and killed in larger and larger numbers. Finally, the American people began to clamor for giving the advisers a bigger role to play.

The Vietnam "war" was never announced but, if I had to pick the date it actually began, I'd use the date in 1962 that President Kennedy stated that US advisors would return fire if fired upon because, from that time on, American involvement in the battles between north and south snowballed to huge numbers. By the end of 1964, there were 23,000 American advisers in South Vietnam. The first US combat troops arrived in South Vietnam in 1965.

The Second Indochina war, commonly called the Vietnam War started in May 1954 according to many historians as when the US violated the "1954 Geneva Agreements on Indochina", even as they were being signed. The US Military use 1 November 1955 as the start date when the first US military advisers were sent to Vietnam.
The war ended on 4 December 1975 when the Pathet Lao took Vientiane, Laos and NOT on 30 April 1975 when the PAVN and NLF took Saigon, Vietnam
The last US troops killed were in May 1975 when US marines attacked Khmer Rouge positions in Kompong Som, Cambodia during the Mayaguez Incident.

When was it announced -- that is unsure. One can probably say sometime in late 1956 when the dissidents started protesting the Diem Regime not allowing the nationwide election that were supposed to take place no later than June 1956 for the reunification of Vietnam and the Diem regime started arresting more people along with beating others up and killing or executing others.

November 1955 was the date when US military advisers were sent to Vietnam (in relation to the Second Indochina war). The first troops sent were actually in May 1944 when OSS officers (forerunner of the CIA) were sent to train and arm the "Peoples Army of Vietnam (PAVN) to fight the Japanese and Vichy French during WW_2. The PAVN later fought and beat the french at Dien Bien Phu in May 1954. The US were sending arms and material to the French along with pilots who flew supply missions from 1948 onwards and combat missions from 1949 onwards.

Protests started back in 1955 but were extremely minimal because of the "McCarthy era" anti-communist rhetoric happening in the US. It was dangerous to be against any war which the US was involved. But there were Anti-war protesters who were mostly Jehovah witnesses, Seven day Adventists and other religious conscientious objectors. There were a few who were against the Second Indochina War because of the illegal actions of the US.
The protests increased slightly in 1956 onwards but it was not until the draft came into affect and Johnson sent ground combat troops to Vietnam in March 1965 that the anti-war movement started to build. It grew even more rapidly after TET of 1968 when it was proven that the US government was lying to the US people and the world.

 

[boedicca]

Why do so many of those that vote for the Democrats think that Medicare and Social Security is a choice?
You are forced to pay for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and you are forced to get it when you retire.
There is no choice and when those who talk about Ayn Rand with regards to getting Medicare and SSI she had no choice either.
She was forced to pay for Medicare and Social Security and she was forced to take it just like all the rest of us.

Just like the New Health Care Act. It was forced on us.

Nonsense.

Nothing is ‘forced’ on anyone, including the ACA.

One must apply and be eligible for Social Security and Medicare. And Medicare is like any other insurance, no one is forced to use it, one may purchase and pay premiums for his own private insurance and ignore the Medicare if he elects to do so.

You're wrong. If one refuses Medicare, one will not receive one's SS benefits.

Amazingly, this is not currently allowed. While the Social Security law does not require participants to accept Medicare, and the Medicare law does not require participants to accept Social Security, the Clinton Administration in 1993 tied the programs together. Under that policy, any senior who withdraws from Medicare also loses Social Security benefits.

Mr. Brown's plaintiffs are three men who do not want to be in Medicare, even though they paid Medicare taxes throughout their income-earning years and though they are not asking for that money back. The three instead saved privately to cover their health care expenses. They now prefer to contract with private doctors and health facilities that they believe are superior to those offered by Medicare.

They don't want to be rationed by a government program facing budget constraints. And they desire, for reasons of privacy, not to have their medical claims in the hands of a federal bureaucracy. One of the plaintiffs, Brian Hall, is a retired federal worker who contributed throughout his career to a health savings account. If required to take Medicare, he will no longer be allowed to make deposits for his medical expenses.

Meanwhile, the three plaintiffs also have contributed considerable sums to the Social Security trust fund. All three understandably want to be paid the monthly retirement benefits that they have duly earned. Yet to do that, they must agree to enroll in Medicare....

Senior Liberation Act - WSJ.com


And for an update on the lawsuit:

Washington, DC – A federal District Court judge [Rosemary Collyer] has dismissed a two-and-a-half year lawsuit charging the Social Security Administration (SSA) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) with adopting policies that deny otherwise eligible retirees their rightful Social Security benefits if those retirees choose not to enroll in Medicare. The lawsuit, known as Hall v. Sebelius, was originally filed October 9, 2008.

“Anyone concerned with what will happen when the bureaucrats start writing the thousands of pages of rules that will govern the ‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’ need only look at what has happened in Hall v. Sebelius,” said Kent Masterson Brown, lead attorney in the case. “When they do, they will realize nothing will be optional and there will be no fair, affordable or swift manner to obtain recourse or appeal a decision made by the bureaucracy.”

The plaintiffs announced this morning their intent to appeal the decision “even if it takes them two-and-a-half more years to win the right to make their own healthcare choices, rather than be beholden to a bureaucracy that knows and cares nothing about their individual circumstances,” Brown said.

Home

 

[Contumacious]

Classic definitions always trump made up current definitions.

It will become single payer if the GOP and the health care industry work to make this system don't work.

If that happens, the electorate will put in a congress and president to make ACA work, even if government has to take over the system.

Oh, single payer is not socialism

Do Canada and the UK have socialized medicine?

Yup, Medicare and Medicaid are single payer, and the programs are not socialism.

Of course, Comrade Starkiev, does not know his ass from a hole in the ground.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Do Canada and the UK have socialized medicine?

Yup, Medicare and Medicaid are single payer, and the programs are not socialism.

Of course, Comrade Starkiev, does not know his ass from a hole in the ground.

Which adds nothing to the conversation and reveals the hole is in your head.

 

[Bfgrn]

let me answer for sallow, all were illegal except the ones started by democrats.

Vietnam War was started by a Democrat

right, 58,000 americans dead and billions wasted in Kennedy and Johnson's fiasco in viet nam.

Our military involvement in Vietnam started with Eisenhower. After the French pulled out, Eisenhower rejected the Geneva Accords in 1954. According to historian David Anderson, writing in 2005, ‘the Eisenhower administration trapped itself and its successors into a commitment to the survival of its own counterfeit creation’, the new ‘state’ of South Vietnam.

Thus Eisenhower's rejection of the Geneva Accords and his ‘nation building’ in South Vietnam constituted the greatest turning point in the US involvement in Vietnam, the point of no return.

Kennedy sent 16,000 advisers to Vietnam, but by 1963 he wanted out of Vietnam. And, as he confided to trusted advisers like McNamara and White House aide O'Donnell, he intended to withdraw completely from Vietnam after he was safely re-elected in 1964. "So we had better make damned sure that I am re-elected," he told O'Donnell.

Fearing a backlash from his generals and the right—under the feisty leadership of Barry Goldwater, his likely opponent in the upcoming presidential race—Kennedy never made his Vietnam plans public.

On October 11, the Kennedy White House issued NSAM 263, which states:

The President approved the military recommendations contained in section I B (1-3) of the report, but directed that no formal announcement be made of the implementation of plans to withdraw 1,000 U.S. military personnel by the end of 1963. Section I(B) of the McNamara-Taylor report, also called for a phased withdrawal be completed by the end of 1965.

Vietnam became LBJ's war, and Nixon's.

 

[Redfish]

Vietnam War was started by a Democrat

right, 58,000 americans dead and billions wasted in Kennedy and Johnson's fiasco in viet nam.

Our military involvement in Vietnam started with Eisenhower. After the French pulled out, Eisenhower rejected the Geneva Accords in 1954. According to historian David Anderson, writing in 2005, ‘the Eisenhower administration trapped itself and its successors into a commitment to the survival of its own counterfeit creation’, the new ‘state’ of South Vietnam.

Thus Eisenhower's rejection of the Geneva Accords and his ‘nation building’ in South Vietnam constituted the greatest turning point in the US involvement in Vietnam, the point of no return.

Kennedy sent 16,000 advisers to Vietnam, but by 1963 he wanted out of Vietnam. And, as he confided to trusted advisers like McNamara and White House aide O'Donnell, he intended to withdraw completely from Vietnam after he was safely re-elected in 1964. "So we had better make damned sure that I am re-elected," he told O'Donnell.

Fearing a backlash from his generals and the right—under the feisty leadership of Barry Goldwater, his likely opponent in the upcoming presidential race—Kennedy never made his Vietnam plans public.

On October 11, the Kennedy White House issued NSAM 263, which states:

The President approved the military recommendations contained in section I B (1-3) of the report, but directed that no formal announcement be made of the implementation of plans to withdraw 1,000 U.S. military personnel by the end of 1963. Section I(B) of the McNamara-Taylor report, also called for a phased withdrawal be completed by the end of 1965.

Vietnam became LBJ's war, and Nixon's.

nice history lesson, but the facts remain, Kennedy and Johnson are primarily responsible for 58,000 american deaths for nothing. what Kennedy MIGHT have done if he had lived is meaningless.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Ask a few doctors what they think of Medicare and Medicaid. Better yet, watch how they have to "budget" only a certain percentage of their practice to these patients because reimbursement is so low, so slow and so mired in red tape. Once they reach their "budgeted" limit of Medicare/Medicaid patients, they accept no more. Ask seniors how hard it can be to find a new Medicare doctor when they need to.

Fine in theory, not so much in practice. Seniors in general like their Medicare, as long as they can find a doc, but the doc has to take a significant cut to see these people.

Medicare would make a plausible universal chassis for diagnostic and preventive services, but giving the whole system to the government would be a huge mistake. Only those who are (for some reason) enamored of the federal bureaucracy would (predictably) support it.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

nice history lesson, but the facts remain, Kennedy and Johnson are primarily responsible for 58,000 american deaths for nothing. what Kennedy MIGHT have done if he had lived is meaningless.

You really do not know our history.

VP Nixon supported the French request to have American naval air forces bomb the VM at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 and Senate Majority Leader Johnson convinced President Eisenhower not to do so. Eisenhower began USA military aid and training to SVN, Kennedy increased aid and troops to 16000, Johnson with the overwhelming support of Congress and the American people increased our troop strength to more than half a million, and Nixon had more than four years to bring the troops home.

Vietnam was as stupid as Iraq II, and was supported overwhelmingly by Congress.

Neo-con stupidity runs strong in both parties.

 

[Redfish]

nice history lesson, but the facts remain, Kennedy and Johnson are primarily responsible for 58,000 american deaths for nothing. what Kennedy MIGHT have done if he had lived is meaningless.

You really do not know our history.

VP Nixon supported the French request to have American naval air forces bomb the VM at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 and Senate Majority Leader Johnson convinced President Eisenhower not to do so. Eisenhower began USA military aid and training to SVN, Kennedy increased aid and troops to 16000, Johnson with the overwhelming support of Congress and the American people increased our troop strength to more than half a million, and Nixon had more than four years to bring the troops home.

Vietnam was as stupid as Iraq II, and was supported overwhelmingly by Congress.

Neo-con stupidity runs strong in both parties.

we are saying the same thing. WTF have you been drinking this morning?

 

[Redfish]

.

Ask a few doctors what they think of Medicare and Medicaid. Better yet, watch how they have to "budget" only a certain percentage of their practice to these patients because reimbursement is so low, so slow and so mired in red tape. Once they reach their "budgeted" limit of Medicare/Medicaid patients, they accept no more. Ask seniors how hard it can be to find a new Medicare doctor when they need to.

Fine in theory, not so much in practice. Seniors in general like their Medicare, as long as they can find a doc, but the doc has to take a significant cut to see these people.

Medicare would make a plausible universal chassis for diagnostic and preventive services, but giving the whole system to the government would be a huge mistake. Only those who are (for some reason) enamored of the federal bureaucracy would (predictably) support it.

.

obamacare will do the same things only moreso. Doctors are already leaving the profession because of obamacare.

The really dumb thing is that ACA does nothing to reduce malpractice awards. Why would a doctor pay 250K/year for malpractice insurance and then have his income limited by obamacare?'

its fricken lunacy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

nice history lesson, but the facts remain, Kennedy and Johnson are primarily responsible for 58,000 american deaths for nothing. what Kennedy MIGHT have done if he had lived is meaningless.

You really do not know our history.

VP Nixon supported the French request to have American naval air forces bomb the VM at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 and Senate Majority Leader Johnson convinced President Eisenhower not to do so. Eisenhower began USA military aid and training to SVN, Kennedy increased aid and troops to 16000, Johnson with the overwhelming support of Congress and the American people increased our troop strength to more than half a million, and Nixon had more than four years to bring the troops home.

Vietnam was as stupid as Iraq II, and was supported overwhelmingly by Congress.

Neo-con stupidity runs strong in both parties.

we are saying the same thing.

No, you have not. But if you say, "Yes, both parties and their leaders were at fault", then I will agree with you.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Ask a few doctors what they think of Medicare and Medicaid. Better yet, watch how they have to "budget" only a certain percentage of their practice to these patients because reimbursement is so low, so slow and so mired in red tape. Once they reach their "budgeted" limit of Medicare/Medicaid patients, they accept no more. Ask seniors how hard it can be to find a new Medicare doctor when they need to.

Fine in theory, not so much in practice. Seniors in general like their Medicare, as long as they can find a doc, but the doc has to take a significant cut to see these people.

Medicare would make a plausible universal chassis for diagnostic and preventive services, but giving the whole system to the government would be a huge mistake. Only those who are (for some reason) enamored of the federal bureaucracy would (predictably) support it.

.

obamacare will do the same things only moreso. Doctors are already leaving the profession because of obamacare.

The really dumb thing is that ACA does nothing to reduce malpractice awards. Why would a doctor pay 250K/year for malpractice insurance and then have his income limited by obamacare?'

its fricken lunacy.

I don't think we're supposed to ask such reasonable questions.

I hope your taxes are all up to date.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Medicare would make a plausible universal chassis for diagnostic and preventive services" as long as it is run in a single-payer system.

So many industrialized nations have universal care that results in better health, longer life span, and much cheaper costs.

 

[Redfish]

You really do not know our history.

VP Nixon supported the French request to have American naval air forces bomb the VM at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 and Senate Majority Leader Johnson convinced President Eisenhower not to do so. Eisenhower began USA military aid and training to SVN, Kennedy increased aid and troops to 16000, Johnson with the overwhelming support of Congress and the American people increased our troop strength to more than half a million, and Nixon had more than four years to bring the troops home.

Vietnam was as stupid as Iraq II, and was supported overwhelmingly by Congress.

Neo-con stupidity runs strong in both parties.

we are saying the same thing.

No, you have not. But if you say, "Yes, both parties and their leaders were at fault", then I will agree with you.

I said that early on, the discussion was which presidents escalated the stupid war and directly caused the deaths of 58,000 americans.

The libs always want to blame everything on the president regardless of what congress did or who controlled congress, so I was following their lead on a topic where they want to change the rules.

 

[Redfish]

"Medicare would make a plausible universal chassis for diagnostic and preventive services" as long as it is run in a single-payer system.

So many industrialized nations have universal care that results in better health, longer life span, and much cheaper costs.

name them. and prove that they have better, cheaper medical care than we do. Be careful with the "better" part when you answer

 

[JakeStarkey]

we are saying the same thing.

No, you have not. But if you say, "Yes, both parties and their leaders were at fault", then I will agree with you.

I said that early on, the discussion was which presidents escalated the stupid war and directly caused the deaths of 58,000 americans.

The libs always want to blame everything on the president regardless of what congress did or who controlled congress, so I was following their lead on a topic where they want to change the rules.

No, you are not saying that, simply saying it was the Left. Bite your toe.

Yeah, both parties were at fault in Vietnam, just as both are for Iraq.

 

[Mac1958]

"Medicare would make a plausible universal chassis for diagnostic and preventive services" as long as it is run in a single-payer system.

So many industrialized nations have universal care that results in better health, longer life span, and much cheaper costs.

And they have significantly healthier lifestyles & diets and far lower diabetes and heart disease rates as a result. Their cultures are different. Ours is in rapid decline.

And actually, I do want universal care, which the ACA does not provide. An efficient partnership between public and private care already exists, and we're ignoring that.

That's okay, though. You're ultimately going to get your way. We're definitely headed there. I just don't understand why more and more Americans are so willing to forgive the rampant waste, bloat, sloth and outright corruption of the federal bureaucracy. It's like a battered wife blaming herself when her husband hits her.

.

 

[Redfish]

No, you have not. But if you say, "Yes, both parties and their leaders were at fault", then I will agree with you.

I said that early on, the discussion was which presidents escalated the stupid war and directly caused the deaths of 58,000 americans.

The libs always want to blame everything on the president regardless of what congress did or who controlled congress, so I was following their lead on a topic where they want to change the rules.

No, you are not saying that, simply saying it was the Left. Bite your toe.

Yeah, both parties were at fault in Vietnam, just as both are for Iraq.

sheech! snake. pour yourself another 4 fingers of whatever you are drinking. YES, both parties have responsibility for Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Grenada, WW1, WW2, and Korea.

The discussion was about who was president during the escalation of viet nam------answer: Kennedy and Johnson. second discussion: which president ended it by declaring defeat, answer: Nixon.

 

[Redfish]

amazing how this thread about Ayn Rand is now about viet nam and obamacare.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I said that early on, the discussion was which presidents escalated the stupid war and directly caused the deaths of 58,000 americans.

The libs always want to blame everything on the president regardless of what congress did or who controlled congress, so I was following their lead on a topic where they want to change the rules.

No, you are not saying that, simply saying it was the Left. Bite your toe.

Yeah, both parties were at fault in Vietnam, just as both are for Iraq.

sheech! snake. pour yourself another 4 fingers of whatever you are drinking. YES, both parties have responsibility for Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Grenada, WW1, WW2, and Korea.

The discussion was about who was president during the escalation of viet nam------answer: Kennedy and Johnson. second discussion: which president ended it by declaring defeat, answer: Nixon.

Four presidents were involved in the escalation until 1965. Nixon took more than four years to proclaim defeat, so you fail about the presidents.

Now enough of this.