Rethinking Camelot: Jfk, the Vietnam War, and U.S. Political Culture

Utilizing the declassified documentary record during the Kennedy Administration, Chomsky makes quite clear the unpleasant fact that John F. Kennedy was essentially no different from Eisenhower, Johnson or even Nixon with regard to foreign policy. While I am a fan of Oliver Stone's JFK, this book provides a detailed refutation of many claims and assumptions the film implies. For example, the notion that John F. Kennedy was secretly against U.S. intervention in Vietnam (yet the troops remained there the entire 3 years he was in office), and National Security Memo 263 has been totally taken out of context, as Kennedy made it quite clear that he didn't want withdrawal with failure, and that the "overriding objective" was victory in Vietnam. And National Security Memo 273, the memo which essentially reversed the "withdrawal" plan noted in 263, was drafted on November 21st (while Kennedy was still alive), and signed by LBJ on November 26th, clearly indicating that Johnson was simply continuing JFK's policies in Nam. As for his remarks, he gave similar remarks to that of why Bush gives that the US should stay in Iraq. On June 17th, 1963, Kennedy said, "For us to withdraw from that effort would mean a collapse not only of South Vietnam, but Southeast Asia. So we are going to stay there", then saying, "I don't agree with those who say we should withdraw" - that's just a sample. On November 22nd, 1961, Kennedy authorized a large scale attack on South Vietnam (yes, South), napalm and "counter-terror" (U.S. terror). It's interesting that this authorization was signed on November 22nd, 1961, exactly 2 years before Kennedy suffered the fate he authorized - murder. As well, Kennedy authorized the invasion of Cuba on April 17th, 1961, and authorized Operation Mongoose, and only turned down Operation Northwoods because he was he knew it wouldn't work. Kennedy, according to the official documents, sanctioned crop burnings, germ warfare, sinking fishing boats, etc. John and Bobby knew all about almost everything that happened, and anyone who says otherwise is full of it. Cross reference everything Chomsky says with the declassified documentary record, which is available in book form in the book The Kennedys and Cuba, assembled by Mark J. White. Once you learn about Kennedy's policies, his assassination, and all the conspiracies become completely irrelevant because he didn't do ANYTHING different from his predecessor and successors. He wanted Vietnam to be a sphere of influence of the United States, regardless how many civilians died, he wanted Castro to be murdered, and Cuba to return back to being mafia and US Corporation ran, and even implemented the fascist dictatorship of Brazil to take power, which they did in 1964, all of which break international law. But then again, since when does the US observe international law? This is a must read. Anton Batey [email protected]

Excellent overview of the relationship between American political/corporate culture and the origens of the Vietnam War. In this case, Chomsky looks at the historical revisionism that clouded the discourse on the assassination of JFK. The book does not debunk the notion that a conspiracy in Dallas occurred; rather the emphasis is on how JFK simply continued (and, in some cases,expanded) the basic thrust of American foreign policy. Using mostly the internal record, Chomsky details JFK and his virulent hawkish and anti-communist ideology, a fact which Camelot propogandists attempt to hide or minimize. Once again, the point is to highlight the reality: a single political party exists today to do the bidding for the corporate sector (of which the military-industrial complex is a large component). Remember, JFK had increased defense spending and forced through a great deal of pro-corporate legislation (while also dragging his heels on Civil Rights legislation and scolding the Warren Court for its progressive leanings) prior to the assassination. All in all, another worthy contribution from one of the great American intellectuals of the 20th century.

In a sharply argued, thoroughly researched book, Noam Chomsky shreds the notion that JFK was some kind of angel who would have ended the Vietnam War by bringing the US armed forces out of Vietnam, and letting the Vietnamese win. Rather, as Chomsky shows all too clearly, Kennedy was the criminal who escalated this war into outright aggression, and planned to withdraw - after victory. Chomsky's comparison of the Kennedy administration with the Reagan administration is certainly thought-provoking; it is good to know that there are Americans brave enough to expose men like JFK for what they are. One only hopes that books like this will destroy once and for all, the lies, deceptions and myths surrounding Camelot.

Although I do not always find Chomsky's political analyses persuasive, this book is a well-presented, sharp rebutal to the theory that JFK planned to pull the US out of Vietnam. Chomsky examines the evidence to support this theory, clearly demonstrating the circumstantial and ambiguous nature of that evidence. He then proceeds to present well-documented information which indicates Kennedy's commitment to avoid losing Vietnam to the Communists. In addition, Chomsky raises a number of critical questions about the nature and intent of the policies which JFK was pursuing during the months prior to his assassination (particularly the coup against Diem), and asks how these can be reconciled with the withdrawal theory. This book should be read by anyone who has read the arguments (e.g. Newman, Prouty) in support of the "Kennedy was going to withdraw" theory before they make up their minds. At the very least Chomsky raises serious questions which must be answered by anyone claiming that John Kennedy had already decided to pull the US out of Vietnam, but was assassinated before being able to do so.