Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Anybody here old enough to remeber the beginnigs of US involvement in Viet Nam? [View all]Kid Berwyn
(24,021 posts)75. And the admirals, and the NSA, but most of all the CIA.
That agency fed LBJ different "numbers" than they had been giving JFK. And Johnson gave them what they wanted: war.
Here's some history little known outside those who've read Newman and, more recently, James W. Douglass:
After JFK assassination, President Truman put his concerns about CIA in print.
One month after the assassination, President Harry S Truman expressed public concern CIA had strayed off the reservation from intelligence gathering of foreign news sources to cloak-and-dagger operations.
Limit CIA Role To Intelligence
By Harry S Truman
The Washington Post, December 22, 1963 - page A11
INDEPENDENCE, MO., Dec. 21 I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence AgencyCIA. At least, I would like to submit here the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency during my Administration, what I expected it to do and how it was to operate as an arm of the President.
I think it is fairly obvious that by and large a President's performance in office is as effective as the information he has and the information he gets. That is to say, that assuming the President himself possesses a knowledge of our history, a sensitive understanding of our institutions, and an insight into the needs and aspirations of the people, he needs to have available to him the most accurate and up-to-the-minute information on what is going on everywhere in the world, and particularly of the trends and developments in all the danger spots in the contest between East and West. This is an immense task and requires a special kind of an intelligence facility.
Of course, every President has available to him all the information gathered by the many intelligence agencies already in existence. The Departments of State, Defense, Commerce, Interior and others are constantly engaged in extensive information gathering and have done excellent work.
But their collective information reached the President all too frequently in conflicting conclusions. At times, the intelligence reports tended to be slanted to conform to established positions of a given department. This becomes confusing and what's worse, such intelligence is of little use to a President in reaching the right decisions.
Therefore, I decided to set up a special organization charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source, and to have those reports reach me as President without department "treatment" or interpretations.
I wanted and needed the information in its "natural raw" state and in as comprehensive a volume as it was practical for me to make full use of it. But the most important thing about this move was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisionsand I thought it was necessary that the President do his own thinking and evaluating.
Since the responsibility for decision making was histhen he had to be sure that no information is kept from him for whatever reason at the discretion of any one department or agency, or that unpleasant facts be kept from him. There are always those who would want to shield a President from bad news or misjudgments to spare him from being "upset."
For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigueand a subject for cold war enemy propaganda.
With all the nonsense put out by Communist propaganda about "Yankee imperialism," "exploitive capitalism," "war-mongering," "monopolists," in their name-calling assault on the West, the last thing we needed was for the CIA to be seized upon as something akin to a subverting influence in the affairs of other people.
I well knew the first temporary director of the CIA, Adm. Souers, and the later permanent directors of the CIA, Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg and Allen Dulles. These were men of the highest character, patriotism and integrityand I assume this is true of all those who continue in charge.
But there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special fieldand that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.
We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.
SOURCE: http://www.maebrussell.com/Prouty/Harry%20Truman's%20CIA%20article.html
That would be better known, but for some reason it got left out of the Washington Post's afternoon edition and out of most all of the nations other newspapers. Nevertheless, to put some emphasis on Trumans essay, former CIA Director Allen Dulles tried to get a retraction:
Are Presidents Afraid of the CIA?
By Ray McGovern
December 29, 2009
Excerpt
Fox Guarding Hen House
The well-connected Dulles got himself appointed to the Warren Commission and took the lead in shaping the investigation of JFKs assassination.
Documents in the Truman Library show that he then mounted a small domestic covert action of his own to neutralize any future airing of Trumans and Souerss warnings about covert action.
So important was this to Dulles that he invented a pretext to get himself invited to visit Truman in Independence, Missouri. On the afternoon of April 17, 1964, Dulles spent a half-hour trying to get the former President to retract what he had said in his op-ed. No dice, said Truman.
No problem, thought Dulles. Four days later, in a formal memo for his old buddy Lawrence Houston, CIA General Counsel from 1947 to 1973, Dulles fabricated a private retraction, claiming that Truman told him the Washington Post article was all wrong, and that Truman seemed quite astounded at it.
No doubt Dulles thought it might be handy to have such a memo in CIA files, just in case.
A fabricated retraction? It certainly seems so, because Truman did not change his tune. Far from it.
In a June 10, 1964, letter to the managing editor of Look magazine, for example, Truman restated his critique of covert action, emphasizing that he never intended the CIA to get involved in strange activities.
CONTINUED...
SOURCE: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/122909b.html
Truman did not point a finger of blame at CIA, Secret Service cough Rowley, the Mafia or anyone. However, it is difficult to think of an innocent explanation for Mr. Dulles response and actions months before President Lyndon B. Johnson would appoint him to the Warren Commission, where he covered up the CIA-Mafia Castro assassination plots and a whole lot more.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
105 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Anybody here old enough to remeber the beginnigs of US involvement in Viet Nam? [View all]
3_Limes
Friday
OP
My father served in Vietnam in 1966-67. He never forgave Johnson and McNamara.
mommymarine2003
Friday
#34
Yeah, at the time, it wasn't a declared war, it was a so called police action,
MarineCombatEngineer
Friday
#56
I saw this unfold as a young mother. My son was 3 years old. I feared the war would drag on until he was 18 and he would
CTyankee
Friday
#10
After Vietnam divided in half in the '50s the US provided financial support to the south,
Ocelot II
Friday
#5
I thought Eisenhower had *advisors* in Vietnam during his administration at the request of the French
Deuxcents
Friday
#78
November 1, 1955 "the official beginning of American involvement in the war"
muriel_volestrangler
Friday
#96
I was in college 1967-1971. There were anti war and civil rights protests all the time. I remember things gaining steam
KitFox
Friday
#37
I started college in 1965 and I had a roommate who was already into the antiwar movement.
Ocelot II
Friday
#41
When they asked me to reenlist or extend my enlistment I was told that they wouldn't send me to Vietnam.
Ping Tung
Friday
#16
His name just came to my brain while going through this thread. I vaguely recall his name because
Ping Tung
Friday
#91
why does they agresser side always say ," it will be over in a few weeKs" but in reality war would last 3/4 years or
AllaN01Bear
Friday
#20
The movie We Were Soldiers opening depicts the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu.
MarineCombatEngineer
Friday
#50
Unlike 1965, a large percentage of people know the real reason for this current BS war.
Crowman2009
Friday
#32
I just posted before I saw yours..Eisenhower had advisors in Vietnam at the request of the French
Deuxcents
Friday
#79
Added to that, the most recent protracted wars are still fresh in people's memories.
Crowman2009
Friday
#35
I'm not old enough to remember the beginnings, but I remember the 60's and 70's.
mommymarine2003
Friday
#57
Same with Afghanistan and Iraq. But we were involved in Vietnam from WWII until the disastrous withdrawal in 1975.
ChicagoTeamster
Friday
#68
A lot of it started (shit had been going with Vietnam, France, China, and others for 100s of years) with WW II
Botany
Friday
#72
Truman was already making moves in 1950, well before Eisenhower was even elected.
Celerity
Friday
#89
Kind of, but Vietnam actually started for the French before the Korean War ended for us.
maxrandb
Friday
#80
I would mark the beginning as 1945 when we supported France's return to their former colony.
flashman13
Friday
#84
"Trump will put the Navy in harms way in a completely untenable situation in the narrow seas in and around...
LudwigPastorius
Friday
#93