The left's fascination with Kennedy leaves me dumbfounded sometimes

[MyNameGoesHere]

He more than any president intervened in socialist and communist progress abroad. Now Brazil? I just don't get it. He was really horrible on non-interference. He probably did as much damage to villainize the progressive movements around the world than any right wing politician.

http://goo.gl/YBce2g

[upaloopa]

1. Well you can cherry pick anyone's life and

make it what you want.
I am glad that when I was a kid growing up in the sixties we didn't go to war over missiles in Cuba.
We were one step away from nuclear war.
The military wanted war. He didn't.

[MyNameGoesHere]

2. Yeah. However you did not mention that we

placed missiles near Russia first. Turkey ring a bell?

After the US had placed nuclear missiles in Turkey, aimed at Moscow, and the failed US attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime, in May 1962 Nikita Khrushchev proposed the idea of placing Soviet nuclear missiles on Cuba to deter any future invasion attempt. During a meeting between Khrushchev and Fidel Castro that July, a secret agreement was reached and construction of several missile sites began in the late summer.

We were the aggressors. He didn't save us from anything, he caused it.

[upaloopa]

3. The missiles in Turkey were obsolete and we

were going to remove them anyway.
The Cold War wasn't tit for tat.
Each side was trying to get the upper hand.

[MyNameGoesHere]

6. Explain to me the deaths caused by obsolete

atomic weapons compared to non-obsolete? Do you really think the people that lived within the death zone were comforted by the fact they were still atomic bombs, but just last years model?

[upaloopa]

4. Look at it the way you want.

I was glad things turned out the way they did.

[upaloopa]

5. Also you are looking at this completely out of context

of everything that happened from the end of WWII till then.
Like I said you can cherry pick all day and paint any picture you want.

[MyNameGoesHere]

7. It isn't cherry picking

He and his administration had a clear goal of interfering in anything "red" related, as did those after him. Yet we don't beatify Nixon or Reagan for doing it, they are normally vilified. THAT is cherry picking.

[upaloopa]

8. We're you alive and aware back then?

I was. We wanted Kennedy to do all of that.
We were all scared shitless of nuclear war.
We had air raid drills, underground shelters and fall out shelters. We had "duck and cover" drills in school.
So I won't ever understand your point of view.

[MyNameGoesHere]

10. You won't ever understand my point of view

because you fell victim to the policies of "rule by fear". Perhaps the difference is when all this was happening I was old enough to know that air raid, drills, duck and cover, and bomb shelters were a ruse to instill a culture of fear and yet make the people feel like they could somehow survive. My personal opinion that the only thing to do in event of a real nuclear launch was to bend over really, really far, and kiss your ass goodbye.

[ctsnowman]

9. He

was about as good as I can expect to ever see come from capitalism.

[socialist_n_TN]

11. Yep that's pretty much it, IMO....

Same with FDR. They did what they did to "save" capitalism, they didn't do it for the people. That the people benefited was purely an accident or at least a secondary consideration. And because the policies of the leaders that came after him were even worse for the people, Kennedy comes off looking like a saint.

[TBF]

12. ^^ this^^. nt

[ctsnowman]

13. Exactly!