It allowed NVA troops to remain in the South. The South Vietnamese, despite their protests, were sold down the river then, long before Frank Church and the Democrats drove the final coffin nail.

Kissinger was outmatched by the North Vietnamese, which goes to show that negotiations should only take place after an unconditional surrender.

George W. Bush showed how war should be conducted by not involving Iran and Syria in any seat at any table, as was advised by The Iraq Study Group.

His vision for the Middle East is becoming clearer right now with the latest Iranian revolution.

Would I vote for Sen. Ensign? I honestly do not know. It would depend if another strong conservative ran against him or not. He is a Senator people, he is not the Messiah. This is one of the big problems we have in America today. We look to our political leaders and government (just consider the idol worship or our President and all his government programs) for the answers to everything, to be our Savior. They are not! They are just like us-human, with frailties. Sen. Ensign has repented and made it right with his wife. That is what the Savior has asked of each of us.
Let’s do it.

Thanks for keeping me straight!

Regards

But the truth is he is to blame for neither. He worked out a peace deal and the democrat congress pulled the rug out from under him. This caused the fall of South Vietnam, the destabilization of Cambodia and pol pot’s ascendancy.

Kissinger might not be a great statesman but there is no blood on his hands.

Ignorance is bliss, have a nice life.

Regards

Regards

I know, he’s gone but I couldn’t let that one go.

And yet, for so many women in the Middle East, the right to NOT wear the hijab or the burka is a sign of freedom. So how unflinching of him was it to call for that “right”?

Ronald Reagan made one thing perfectly clear – that the communist regimes were evil and they had to go. And he never softened that attitude, because he had it correct. “Mr. Gorbachev – TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!!” Can you image obamos saying something like that? Neither can I.

It wasn’t about “revolutionary movements” (which is marxist drivel about “forces” and anti-individualistic things of that sort). It was about a revolutionary IDEA. And besides moving to defeat the Red Army in Afghanistan (something else obamos would never have done), everything possible was done to pry loopholes open (via any means possible) to get information behind the Iron Curtain.

Lee said that Grant turned his face toward Richmond, and never relented until it fell. Similarly, Reagan turned his face toward Moscow – and never relented until it fell.

I have been making multiple business trips a year to eastern Europe for nearly a decade now, and over there they sure know the story of who won and why. Statues of Ronald Reagan are going up all over the place, and plazas and boulevards are being named after him.

The mighty obamos was around back then, and it’s pretty clear where he stood because he’s doing now exactly what Reagan’s DETRACTORS wanted to do back then – make cooing noises at the cuddly Soviet Union, cut a deal on any terms they would offer, and pretend that somehow it all worked…. even if that meant PERMANENTLY consigning hundreds of millions of fellow human beings to the darkness forever…. and if meant surrendering our civilization to communism…. “Oh, well, at least we meant well – and where there’s life there’s hope (?!), right?”

That’s all obamos wants to do – coo at the mullahs with the notion that they’ll lighten up, cut him a deal, and go away. This is the same nonsense that darn near lost us the Cold War. It’s the approach of a weak man, a Carter – not that of a strong man, a Reagan.

Please don’t slur the memory of a great man like Ronald Reagan as you have done.