23-02-2011, 06:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 23-02-2011, 09:23 PM by Greg Burnham.)
Albert,
My take on the significance of the DRAFT of NSAM 273, particularly the fact that it was written and signed by Bundy the day before the assassination, is simple. It is a "bridge document" intended to deceive historians for generations by falsely linking the JFK Vietnam Policy of withdrawal to the LBJ Vietnam Policy of escalation, which followed immediately after the assassination as a first step on November 26th. The culmination of the policy reversal occurred in March 1964 with the signing of NSAM 288.
Again, the fact that Bundy authored NSAM 263 in such a way as to obscure the "meat" of the policy directive speaks volumes. The policy directive is contained in the ONLY portion of the entire McNamara-Taylor Report that was approved by the president. That section is unequivocally ordering the winding down of US involvement in Vietnam by aggressively developing a program to train the Vietnamese to assume all of the functions that were (as of that time) still being performed by US personnel with the forward looking goal of withdrawing from the Delta region by the end of 1964 and a complete withdrawal by the end of 1965. Yet, when one reads the document (NSAM 263) without knowing the section of the McNamara-Taylor Report being referenced as approved by the president, one does not know that it calls for withdrawal! In fact, without digging up the McNamara-Taylor Report section referenced, NSAM 263 is quite vanilla and almost without significance.
However, withdrawal from Vietnam was the standing policy of the USGOV as of October 11, 1963 when NSAM 263 was signed--and was still in effect on November 21, 1963--the day the DRAFT of NSAM 273 was written and signed by Bundy. This is a smoking gun for several reasons, the very least of which includes the implication of Bundy in the perfidy before the fact.
I tend to agree with Charles on this one. I don't believe the contents and significance of these documents were intended to be made public. I think the timing of the draft document is intended to obscure the fact that LBJ did, in fact, reverse Kennedy's withdrawal policy allowing his new policy to appear to be a continuation of the former when, in fact, it was anything of the sort.
[video=vimeo;17699759]http://vimeo.com/17699759[/video]
[video=vimeo;17700009]http://vimeo.com/17700009[/video]
My take on the significance of the DRAFT of NSAM 273, particularly the fact that it was written and signed by Bundy the day before the assassination, is simple. It is a "bridge document" intended to deceive historians for generations by falsely linking the JFK Vietnam Policy of withdrawal to the LBJ Vietnam Policy of escalation, which followed immediately after the assassination as a first step on November 26th. The culmination of the policy reversal occurred in March 1964 with the signing of NSAM 288.
Again, the fact that Bundy authored NSAM 263 in such a way as to obscure the "meat" of the policy directive speaks volumes. The policy directive is contained in the ONLY portion of the entire McNamara-Taylor Report that was approved by the president. That section is unequivocally ordering the winding down of US involvement in Vietnam by aggressively developing a program to train the Vietnamese to assume all of the functions that were (as of that time) still being performed by US personnel with the forward looking goal of withdrawing from the Delta region by the end of 1964 and a complete withdrawal by the end of 1965. Yet, when one reads the document (NSAM 263) without knowing the section of the McNamara-Taylor Report being referenced as approved by the president, one does not know that it calls for withdrawal! In fact, without digging up the McNamara-Taylor Report section referenced, NSAM 263 is quite vanilla and almost without significance.
However, withdrawal from Vietnam was the standing policy of the USGOV as of October 11, 1963 when NSAM 263 was signed--and was still in effect on November 21, 1963--the day the DRAFT of NSAM 273 was written and signed by Bundy. This is a smoking gun for several reasons, the very least of which includes the implication of Bundy in the perfidy before the fact.
I tend to agree with Charles on this one. I don't believe the contents and significance of these documents were intended to be made public. I think the timing of the draft document is intended to obscure the fact that LBJ did, in fact, reverse Kennedy's withdrawal policy allowing his new policy to appear to be a continuation of the former when, in fact, it was anything of the sort.
[video=vimeo;17699759]http://vimeo.com/17699759[/video]
[video=vimeo;17700009]http://vimeo.com/17700009[/video]
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)