August 25, 2005

A TOUGH ROW OR HO?

Hugo, Uncle Ho and Uncle Sam (Curtis A White, 8/26/05, Asia Times)

Whatever Robertson's frustrations with Chavez, they seem to be eerily reminiscent of the unwarranted frustrations the US had with the late Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam.

Millions of Vietnamese lives would have been spared had we just whacked Ho instead and what a quarter of the population of Cambodia?

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 25, 2005 12:00 AM
Comments

That's putting a lot of faith into the effectiveness of assasination. It's possible, probably even likely, that the war would have gone on even without Ho Chi Minh.

Posted by: Brandon at August 25, 2005 9:45 AM

Brandon:

Fine, assassinate his replacement.

Posted by: oj at August 25, 2005 9:59 AM

First lets let the people of Venezuela marinate in the consequences of their mistake. Wait until Chavez ruins the economy, suspends civil rights and starts capping the opposition. Then we can whack Chavez and the Venezuelans will look at us as heroes.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at August 25, 2005 10:55 AM

you aren't a hero if you insist on teaching them a lesson first.

Posted by: oj at August 25, 2005 11:07 AM

Sometimes you just have to have tough love and forgo boosting your own ego as a hero for the greater good. Besides, we won't be teaching them a lesson, Chavez will.

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at August 25, 2005 11:12 AM

Hitler taught the Germans a lesson--we lost a lot of Americans unteaching them.

Posted by: oj at August 25, 2005 11:15 AM

OK - I don't a have cable TV and I was at the gym last night and the cable news that was on was doing an entire segment on Pat Robertson's comment - with special music and graphics and all. WHY? Am I missing something? Is Robertson a government official or even a particularly famous person? I'm willing to bet that had it gone unreported less than a tenth of a percent of the Christian American population would have heard what he said, much less the general population. Every time I go to the gym I'm reminded why I don't have cable.

Posted by: Shelton at August 25, 2005 12:21 PM

Kennedy was disatisfied with Diem. So he had him whacked. Kennedy was irritated with Castro so he tried to have him whacked, but failed. Other than those two things, he was a terrible President.

Posted by: h-man at August 25, 2005 1:05 PM

Those two things helped make him terrible. Diem should have lived and Castro been killed--then he'd have been at least a decent president.

Posted by: oj at August 25, 2005 1:48 PM
« THE COURT FOLLOWS THE ELECTION RETURNS: | Main | THEIR TURN: »