Ike: Republican God or Commie Stooge?

[Zkribbler]

2) failed to help the French at Dien Bien Phu when asked (the help was available in the form of the American fleet that was just offshore at the time);

Dien Bien Phu is inland. The navy has always had a hard time sailing over hills and through jungles.

[Ned]

Z, What the French needed was air support. We could have provided that in spades.

[Ned]

Yeah, guys, I had a good laugh when I posted this. But, with any good troll, there is an element of truth in the post. What got me going in this direction was Ike's failure to help the French at Dien Bien Phu, which was a recent topic on the Military Channel. Had that help been supplied, the French may have won, just as we won 14 years later at Khe Sanh when airpower proved decisive. Had the French won, arguably there would have been no commie North and no Vietnam war.

Surrendering the Suez Canal to the UAR lead directly to the '67 war and unrest in the Mid East since. Had the Brits and the French remained between the UAR and the Israeli's, there could have been no war in '67.

Looking back, Ike could have done something about Castro. But he failed to act. Another instance where he could have prevented a pound of a cure with a penny of wisdom.

Regardless of your feelings about McCarthy, he was rooting out the commies from the administration. It would have been wiser to let him get on with his dirty business.

As to Hungary, who knows what the USSR would have done had Ike supplied the Huns with military support. I don't think the commies really wanted a full scale war with the US given our huge lead in airpower.

And so on.

The whole of the Eisenhower administration can be viewed as a failure to act when the cost of acting was small. Those failures cost us dearly in the end.

So the question really has to be asked. What was Eisenhower smoking?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
6) shut down McCarthy who was rooting out commies from the State Department;

was a dark time in the history of the USA. It defiled every concept the country was based upon.

Yep. definately having a stroke

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned

Regardless of your feelings about McCarthy, he was rooting out the commies from the administration. It would have been wiser to let him get on with his dirty business.

Regardless of your feelings about flamethrowers, they do kill household insects. It would be wise to use a flamethrower in your house, unless you want an infestation!

[mrmitchell]

I agree with Ned. Eisenhower was an agent for the Soviets.

[joncha]

He also bore a striking resemblance to Magnum P.I.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
What got me going in this direction was Ike's failure to help the French at Dien Bien Phu, which was a recent topic on the Military Channel. Had that help been supplied, the French may have won, just as we won 14 years later at Khe Sanh when airpower proved decisive. Had the French won, arguably there would have been no commie North and no Vietnam war.

France would have gotten kicked out of Vietnam in any case in the long run. Just like every colonist in the world eventually got kicked out of its large colonies post-WW2. History was on the side of the nationals.

And since the most active resistors to the French oppression were the Commies, there would have been a communist power in Vietnam. Arguably, had the war lasted longer, the Commies might have had full power over Vietnam. Or Vietnam might become an "unaligned" country, playing both powers, Egypt, India or Algeria style
(incidentally, Cuba might have become an "unaligned" country, had the US not alienated Castro so much. At the beginning, Castro was more of a nationalist with some socialist policies, nothing like the commie he quickly became in order to be protected from the US).

Surrendering the Suez Canal to the UAR lead directly to the '67 war and unrest in the Mid East since. Had the Brits and the French remained between the UAR and the Israeli's, there could have been no war in '67.

Suez' 56 was very favourable to American interests. It was the humbling experience that made France, and most of all Britain, acknowledge that they weren't the big shots anymore. It led these two countries to be firmly on the western side, under the US aegis. Later, de Gaulle tried to restore the French grandeur (and the country became less vassalized, while still on the US side), but the Brits always remained firmly under US leadership.

[Az]

Suez' 56 was very favourable to American interests.

Yeah, the rise of Nasser to arab leadership and the fall of most of the mid east into soviet hands was very favourable to american interests. A genuine powerplay.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Az

Suez' 56 was very favourable to American interests.

Yeah, the rise of Nasser to arab leadership and the fall of most of the mid east into soviet hands was very favourable to american interests. A genuine powerplay.

It's not the American (lack of) intervention in 56 that put the Middle East into Soviet hands. The US had completely failed to please the local powers. The non-support to Britain-France could have helped in this regard, if there had been a global strategy of acquiring client states in the area. There wasn't. (well, if you don't count Israel, that is)

After Suez 56, the Brits completely agreed with becoming a second-rank power. Coming from the former #1, that's quite a step. Since then, they've remained both the most faithful and most powerful vassal the US could count upon.

[Az]

It's not the American (lack of) intervention in 56 that put the Middle East into Soviet hands. The US had completely failed to please the local powers. The non-support to Britain-France could have helped in this regard, if there had been a global strategy of acquiring client states in the area. There wasn't. (well, if you don't count Israel, that is)

You think that Nasser's and Pan-Arabism rise to prominence after 56' has nothing to do with this?

Nasser could've been crushed. You didn't need america's assistance, just lack of meddling on the behalf of Nasser ( because they tried to lure him to their side, , another powerplay )

Israel wasn't an american client state at 56'. It was quite the opposite seeing as americans planned to invade us then. It was a franco-British client state, shamefully ( due to lack of choice, though, but still )

[Lodi]

Was his Dick of a VP ever considered during the Ike years in the same way as Dick Cheney is now? You know the whole thing about Cheney being the Lord of Darkness and strangling kittens in front of kids in wheelchairs?

[LordShiva]

Interstate Highway System

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Lodi
Was his Dick of a VP ever considered during the Ike years in the same way as Dick Cheney is now? You know the whole thing about Cheney being the Lord of Darkness and strangling kittens in front of kids in wheelchairs?

Pretty close. Nixon was the first 20 th century pol to make the office of VP a strong position. He was also Eisenhowers hit man/rotweiller.

This probably started his long hate/hate affair with the press as a consequence.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Interstate Highway System

Ya beat me to it!