If it wasn't for 'Nam would LBJ be one the best Presidents in the 20th Century? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 16, 2024, 04:26:02 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  If it wasn't for 'Nam would LBJ be one the best Presidents in the 20th Century? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: If it wasn't for 'Nam would LBJ be one the best Presidents in the 20th Century?
#1
Yes--- Top 3 or 4
 
#2
Yes--- Top 5 or 6
 
#3
Maybe---- but gets bumped off the top of the charts
 
#4
No--- Decent Pres but issues with social and economic policies
 
#5
No--- One of the worst Ever
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 84

Author Topic: If it wasn't for 'Nam would LBJ be one the best Presidents in the 20th Century?  (Read 4373 times)
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,907


« on: June 13, 2017, 08:18:58 PM »

Isn't that like saying "If it wasn't for the Depression, Herbert Hoover would be the best Republican President in the last century?"
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,907


« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2017, 07:37:58 PM »
« Edited: June 14, 2017, 07:44:52 PM by The Mikado »

Isn't that like saying "If it wasn't for the Depression, Herbert Hoover would be the best Republican President in the last century?"

Apples and Oranges. LBJ had a long list of Domestic Policy successes that were/are overshadowed by Vietnam. What policy successes (foreign and domestic) did Hoover have that were successful?

The point is that Vietnam is far and away the most important and impactful part of his Administration and outweighs any other accomplishment. You can't just handwave it. It's as important to LBJ's story as the Depression is to Hoover or the First World War is to Wilson (neither of whom would want to be identified with either of those crises and both of whom had interests in wildly different areas overshadowed by the gigantic era-defining crisis they're assessed on).

EDIT: Launching a war under false pretenses that involved the defoliation of ancient forests, the mass murder of over a million civilians, the wasteful and pointless deaths of nearly sixty thousand American soldiers and the injuries and imprisonment of far more, and culminated in destabilizing and crumbling a regime in Cambodia that led to the genocidal murder of millions absolutely outweighs anything LBJ did on the domestic front, by such an order of magnitude that the two aren't comparable.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 13 queries.