Thursday, December 6, 2012

Lyndon B. Johnson- Policy in Vietnam

President Lyndon B. Johnson makes a speech on April 7, 1965 addressing the war in Vietnam, his concerns and why it is his goal and the goal of America to help South Viet-nam. President Johnson intentions is to keep a promise in which he offers support to the people in South Viet-nam and promises to defend their independence. A promise that American Presidents have made and kept since 1954. People all over the world depended on President Johnson to help them, God Forbid they were attacked during the Viet-nam war and Johnson refused to let them down.In his address President Johnson mention that:
"We are there because there be great stakes in the balance. Let no one think for a moment that retreat from Viet-nam would bring an end to conflict. The battle would be renewed in one country and then in another. The central lesson of our time is that the appetite of aggression is never satisfied. To withdraw from one battle field means only to prepare for the next". 
This statement to me means that even after a war has ended a countries be cautious and aware of what could happen next. Nations all around the world should be prepared for any conflict that may come their way because there will always be enemies trying to destroy them. So, President Johnson feels as if it is his responsibility to defend and protect the people who are at risk of being hit during the war.

The objectives that were focused on by President Johnson was stop the spread of communism. He believed in the domino theory which states that if one southeast asian territory fell to communism then the rest would follow suit and join the communist territories. President Johnson really wanted the spread of communism to stop throughout these areas. He made a promise to the people of these territories that he would not let communism spread towards their parts and that he would help preserve a land that we had the best intentions for. The ultimate goal was for South Vietnam was to become free from attacks and run their land the way that they saw best. President Johnson did not want to do this in order for the United States to gain something but for the South Vietnamese to live in peace. He also stated later than until things can be talked peacefully through discussions, then force will be necessary to achieve the independence they need.

By Julian Z. and Kiara P.

House Judiciary Committee, Articles of Impeachment

House of judiciary Committee, Article of Impeachment Agustin 20, 1974

Richard Nixon ran for presidency in 1960, but lost to John F. Kennedy. After running for Governor of California once again and coming up short he stated that he was finished with politics. However, he ran again in 1972, this time, he was successful. Nixon won against Democrat George McGovern by 60 percent of popular votes.

Throughout is Presidency Nixon carried out much dishonestly for personal advantages that were unlawful. During his time in office, President Nixon and his major assistants became deeply involved in illegal activities against the opposing committee.
At first he denied the incident inside the Watergate Office Complex in Washington the democratic national committee headquarters, where five burglars broke-in to try to record the opposing candidate’s conversation to try and get a step up on the competition. They were arrested by the police at 2:30 a.m. The investigators found out that the burglars were employed by President Nixon. President Nixon denied it by stating   "No one in the White House staff, no one in this administration presently employed, was involved in this way bizarre incident”   Nether the less, The House Judiciary Committee began its final debate on the impeachment of President Nixon for his illegal activities surrounding the Watergate scandal on July 24, 1974. They came up with three articles for President Nixon impeachment.

Article 1: Obstruction of Justice.

This article stated that the full House should impeach Nixon for the high crime of deliberately engaging in obstruction of justice by attempting to cover up the Watergate investigation. Nixon Designed to delay, impede and obstruct investigations of such unlawful entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities. Passed by vote of 27 to 11.

Article 2: Abuse of Power.

It charged the president with abuse of powers, in violation of the Constitution, by using the IRS, the FBI, and other government agencies to spy on American citizens. Nixon repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, imparting the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposes of these agencies. Passed by vote of 28 to 10

Article 3: Contempt of Congress.

It charged that Nixon violated the Constitution by ignoring congressional subpoenas of White House documents. In refusing to produce these papers and things, Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful orders of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by Constitution in the House of Representatives. Passed by a vote of 21 to 17
Nick Brengel, Shantana Folkes

Senator J. William Fulbright on the Arrogance of Power, 1966


The attitude above all others which I feel sure is no longer valid is the arrogance of power, the tendency of great nations to equate power with virtue and major responsibilities with a universal mission. The dilemmas involved are preeminently American di lemmas, not because America has weaknesses that others do not have but because America is powerful as no nation has ever been before and the discrepancy between its power and the power of others appears to be increasing....

We are now engaged in a war to "defend freedom" in South Vietnam. Unlike the Republic of Korea, South Vietnam has an army which [is] without notable success and a weak, dictatorial government which does not command the loyalty of the South Vietn amese people. The official war aims of the United States Government, as I understand them, are to defeat what is regarded as North Vietnamese aggression, to demonstrate the futility of what the communists call "wars of national liberation," and to create conditions under which the South Vietnamese people will be able freely to determine their own future. I have not the slightest doubt of the sincerity of the President and the Vice President and the Secretaries of State and Defense in propounding these aims. What I do doubt_and doubt very much_is the ability of the United States to achieve these aims by the means being used. I do not question the power of our weapons and the efficiency of our logistics; I cannot say these things delight me as the y seem to delight some of our officials, but they are certainly impressive. What I do question is the ability of the United States, or France or any other Western nation, to go into a small, alien, undeveloped Asian nation and create stability where there is chaos, the will to fight where there is defeatism, democracy racy where there is no tradition of it and honest government where corruption is almost a way of life. Our handicap is well expressed in the pungent Chinese proverb: "In shallo w waters dragons become the sport of shrimps."

Early last month demonstrators in Saigon burned American jeeps, tried to assault American soldiers, and marched through the streets shouting "Down with the American imperialists," while one of the Buddhist leaders made a speech equating the Unit ed States with the communists as a threat to South Vietnamese independence. Most Americans are understandably shocked ant angered to encounter such hostility from people who by now would be under the rule of the Viet Cong but for the sacrifice of American lives and money. Why, we may ask, are they so shockingly ungrateful? Surely they must know that their very right to parade and protest and demonstrate depends on the Americans who are defending them.

The answer, I think, is that "fatal impact" of the rich and strong on the poor and weak. Dependent on it though the Vietnamese are, our very strength is a reproach to their weakness, our wealth a mockery of their poverty, our success a reminder of their failures. What they resent is the disruptive effect of our strong culture upon their fragile one, an effect which we can no more avoid than a man can help being bigger than a child. What they fear, I think rightly, is that traditional Vietnamese society cannot survive the American economic and cultural impact....

The cause of our difficulties in southeast Asia is not a deficiency of power but an excess of the wrong kind of power which results in a feeling of impotence when it fails to achieve its desired ends. We are still acting like boy scouts dragging reluctant old ladies across the streets they do not want to cross. We are trying to remake Vietnamese society, a task which certainly cannot be accomplished by force and which probably cannot be accomplished by any means available to outsiders. The objective may b e desirable, but it is not feasible....

If America has a service to perform in the world_and I believe it has_it is in large part the service of its own example. In our excessive involvement in the affairs of other countries, we are not only living off our assets and denying our own people the proper enjoyment of their resources; we are also denying the world the example of a free society enjoying its freedom to the fullest. This is regrettable indeed for a nation that aspires to teach democracy to other nations, because, as Burke said! "E xample is the school of mankind, and they will learn at no other." . . .

There are many respects in which America, if it can bring itself to act with the magnanimity and the empathy appropriate to its size and power, can be an intelligent example to the world. We have the opportunity to set an example of generous understanding in our relations with China, of practical cooperation for peace in our relations with Russia, of reliable and respectful partnership in our relations with Western Europe, of material helpfulness without moral presumption in our relations with the develop ing nations, of abstention from the temptations of hegemony in our relations with Latin America, and of the all- around advantages of minding one's own business in our relations with everybody. Most of all, we have the opportunity to serve as an example o f democracy to the world by the way in which we run our own society; America, in the words of John Quincy Adams, should be "the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all" but "the champion and vindicator only of her own." . . .

If we can bring ourselves so to act, we will have overcome the dangers of the arrogance of power. It will involve, no doubt, the loss of certain glories, but that seems a price worth paying for the probable rewards, which are the happiness of America and the peace of the world.

By: Zully Arias , Imarys Bruno




Declaration of Environmental Rights 1970 by LINDSAY MISCHKE

In the 1950’s and the 1960’s, economic growth was powered by oil.  The United States produced more oil than they actually used or needed.  Large offshore deposits of oil were discovered off of the California coast, and in order to obtain this oil, a new technology of underwater drilling had to be done which was dangerous.  In the winter of 1969, off the coast, lots of sticky black petroleum floated up to the top and suffocated thousands of fish and trapped many seabirds.

·        Fish, birds & oil washed up on shore, ruining many beaches

·        Santa Barbara was affected the most

A group of angry citizens came together to protect the environment and to state how mad they were about the wasteful ways of Americans.  Although the economic growth was a success, it was overshadowed by the harm it did to the natural world.  Humans have been abusing the world for many years now.  The environmental disaster of the Santa Barbara channel brought many environmental issues up:

§  Littering

§  Humans have taken up much natural land

§  We have stripped the forest and grasses and reduced the soil

§  We contaminate the air WE breathe

§  Pollution of the lakes, rivers & oceans

§  We have exterminated species of birds and animals and brought others close to  it

§  “Made physical world ugly and loud depriving man of the beauty and quiet that feeds his spirit.” (Hofstadter p. 507)

We are able to solve this problem by simply using our minds, not machines.  People need to realize that man is a member of his community, not the master of it.  We must treat our backyards as if they were the world and the world as if it were our backyard. 


                  A recent article relating to a recent BP deepwater oil spill..
"Offshore drilling is inherently dirty and dangerous and needs to be phased out."

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Nuclear weapons and Cold War

President John F. Kennedy once said in his speech addressing nuclear testing during The Cold War era. "The treaty initiated yesterday... is a limited treaty which permits continued underground testing and prohibits only those tests that we ourselves can police. It requires no control posts, no on-site inspection, no international body. nation's rights of self- defense will in any way be impaired. Nor does this treaty mean the end of the nuclear war. It will not reduce nuclear stockpiles; it will not halt the production of nuclear weapons; it will not restrict their use in their time of war. Nevertheless, it will reduce the nuclear testing which would otherwise be conducted on both sides; it will prohibit the United States, United Kingdom, Soviet Union, and all others who sign it from engaging in the atmospheric tests which have so alarmed mankind; and it offers to all the world a welcome sign of hope"
nuclear testing cartoons, nuclear testing cartoon, nuclear testing picture, nuclear testing pictures, nuclear testing image, nuclear testing images, nuclear testing illustration, nuclear testing illustrations

John f Kennedys Inaugural Adress

On January 20 1961, John F kennedy took an oath in office to became the nations 35th president. The Cold War had dominated the rhetoric of both Kennedy and Nixon's campaign. Through his breif inaugural address, Kennedy sought to send a  message of his hope for peace during the nuclear age.

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

 In a time period of insescurity and distrust a speech  was needed.The period refferred to as the Cold War revolvesd around the relationship that developed between the USA and the USSR. It was meant to settle International affairs such as the Cuban Missle Crisis, and the Berlin Wall.

"To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge—to convert our good words into good deeds—in a new alliance for progress—to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty. But this peaceful revolution of hope cannot become the prey of hostile powers. Let all our neighbors know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know that this Hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house...
our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support—to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective—to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak—and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run.
Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction."
Kennedy provided a sense of security, and reassurance throughout his inaugral speech. This with the addition of his confident aura play a part in making the inaugural address a historical landmark.