The Wave of Immigrants the Democrats Want to Give Us
Operation”Frequent Wind”: 32 years ago. What: The evacuation scores of friendly Vietnamese, rushing to get away from the onslaught of the North Vietnamese Army, rolling into Saigon. Why: Because we are Americans and we value loyalty and we are compassionate and we didn’t want our friend to die by the hands of the Communists.How did this come to be? The “defeatocrats” had won the battle and “defunded the war.” First they pulled money from our troops, then for all military aid to the South Vietnamese government.Sound familiar? Yes, it does. Toss this into the intellectual mixing bowl: In 1968, a new president, Richard Nixon, began pulling our troops out, based on the political pressures within our nation. He just didn’t load them up and bring them home, but put into place “Vietnamization” as a palatable strategy to fight the war, but not with US troops directly.
Soon after taking office. President Richard Nixon introduced his policy of “vietnamization”. The plan was to encourage the South Vietnamese to take more responsibility for fighting the war. It was hoped that this policy would eventually enable the United States to withdraw gradually all their soldiers from Vietnam.
In other wrods, it was a different strategy than had been in place under the Johnson Administration, which essentially was taking raw military might as the main “tool” in the diplomacy tool box.
The net result of Vietnamization was it was working, with the US supplying the air power to support the RVN ground units. Once funding for US military units was taken away, then the RVN forces began to loose the fight. Then when the funding for supplies for those troops was pulled, the war was lost.
Who had control of the Congress? The Democrats. Who had pushed for this? The Democrats. Sound like the same news could be on a newspaper headline near you soon? Yes. How about historians who can cut and paste from their works on Vietnam and then search and replace for a few names and dates and titles of bills in the Congress to record what happens next?
- The beleagured Iraqis, who risked their lives, and those of their families (and most likely did lose family already), believing we would, in the post-Saddam era, help them forge a free and safe country will be disillusioned. As they become US citizens, they will most likely not forget the petty political power struggles between Democrats that caused them to have to flee their native land for political asylum. Their votes will not fall in the Democrat’s column, nor will a few generations (at least the one following) either. Not good for the Dems.
- While the process is streamlined, much as we have done for the Cubans when they fled Castro, some who are able to get in the line to head to the US will be moles from al-Qaeda. They will, because of the rapidity with which each applicant will be handled, manage to avoid detection and then be set down in our midst, to begin to work from the inside. Whatever the next “9/11 Commission” we hold will have to struggle with a hard fact: It was some who we granted asylum to, who would not be here except for the fact that we pulled out before the job was done.
I don’t think one or the other are too far fetched. In the larger picture, I think it will be a combination of both scenarios, and the only question will be which plays out before the other?
The wave of immigration the Dems surely don’t want, but I’m sure they haven’t thought that through for gaming out the possible futures seems to be their extremely weak suit.
Tracked back @: EagleSpeak, Third World County
Categories: Geo-Political, History, Military, Military History, Political