Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Incredibly Stupid One

lowellmilkencenter.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 86 posts

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#41

Post by beachy »

tasty_freeze wrote: post #36
beachy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Vietnam war (or the American war as I was corrected in a bar in Hanoi) was the epitome of unintended escalation. One of the early escalators was JFK, who was simultaneously extremely wary of escalation, and is not someone who most people think of as an asshole politician. Your point has some heft but it's a simplistic take.

The Errol Morris documentary "The Fog Of War" about Robert McNamara is amazing. Even though McNamara was in his 80s when it was filmed, his mind was still razor sharp. McNamara was highly self-reflective and was not someone to whitewash history, even his own. The documentary covers various phases of McNamara's career, including his contribution to the Tokyo firebombing raids in WWII, and a short bit about his work at…

It's amazing how brutally honest McNamara was about his own failings in bringing an MBA type approach to a foreign war.

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#43

Post by colburnmh »

adamrezich wrote: post #13
beachy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Vietnam war (or the American war as I was corrected in a bar in Hanoi) was the epitome of unintended escalation. One of the early escalators was JFK, who was simultaneously extremely wary of escalation, and is not someone who most people think of as an asshole politician. Your point has some heft but it's a simplistic take.

isn't it also a bit of a simplistic take to think that American Presidents truly have the "Commander-in-Chief" power w.r.t. war decisions that they have on paper?

Presidents, like leaders in business or the military, realize that they don't have the current experience, situational knowledge, or training necessary to dictate details on the ground. Therefore, they dictate high-level foreign policy, political, and strategic military goals and delegate the strategic and tactical details to the military leaders who have the appropriate knowledge to carry them out. Occasionally, they get involved in specific tactical decisions, like authorizing politically sensitive actions (e.g., the Bin Laden raid).

You would not expect the CEO of a large multi-national company to manage all of the details of every department within their company. When you combine all 5 of the armed forces together, it's far more complex than any company on earth, and managing the military is not the President's only responsibility.

The President's direction of the military is also bound, to some degree, by the Legislative and Judicial branches of the government. For example, they can't declare war on a country unilaterally. But those restrictions, while important, are not particularly constraintaining at a day-to-day level. The President has wide latitude to direct the military as they see fit. That includings projecting military power as deterrents against hostile foreign powers or engaging in short-term, small-scale offensive operations abroad.

So, no, Presidents aren't going to the front lines and directing troops like kings of old. That went out of fashion around the time of Napoleon. But good business leaders don't micromanage their workers and departmental details, either. They realize, hopefully, that doing so would do more harm than good.

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#44

Post by thedailymail »

dvt wrote: post #35
vba616 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This seems a bit disingenuous, as they have, by definition, a very high risk of defaulting I'm aware junk bonds have a relatively high expected risk of default and I'm not being disingenuous. Please assume that I'm sincere, as it's required by the HN guidelines, and also, I am. I didn't say anything is a victimless crime or say victimless crimes are ok (or acts that have victims are always wrong). So let's not go on…

Okay, maybe we're just speaking past each other. My point is pretty simple, and you're right that I should not have brought up victimless crimes, etc. I'm just trying to say: here's some rich guy that did bad stuff, went to jail, and received the equivalent of a slap on the wrist, essentially rebranded his image, and is now back at the adults' table as a philanthropist, even though his wealth is funded by his past il…

I came here to say pretty much the same thing. Thanks for putting it so well. Not all strategic use of ill-gotten wealth is "philanthropic" (= motivated by the love of humanity).

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#45

Post by RC_ITR »

Stratoscope wrote: post #40

This reminds me of Jeremiah Denton, a POW in that same war who was interviewed on TV to explain that the prisoners were being treated humanely. As he gave the verbal answers his captors expected, he blinked his eyes in Morse Code: – ––– •–• – ••– •–• • T O R T U R E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rufnWLVQcKg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Denton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_code Epilog: A few years ag…

> It made me think how so few of us in each country really wanted to fight these wars.

Well, counterpoint: it really shows how China’s ascent has made for strange bedfellows.

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#46

Post by derefr »

dvt wrote: post #22
tedheath123 wrote: post #11

Irrelevant to the content of the article, but worth pointing out that this project is funded by the proceeds of crimes committed at Drexel Burnham in the 80s. Michael Milken and his brother Lowell undoubtedly do good through their philanthrophy, but the cynic in me suspects that it is primarily an attempt to rehabilate their image and is treated as a business expense. Maybe it doesn't matter if you do good for the wr…

I live in Santa Monica and often walk past the Lowell Milken Family Foundation (which is close to the posh downtown). I always kind of smile and think about the story of how the Milken Family completely reinvented itself. Michael Milken, for context, was paid the highest yearly salary in the history of the world (~250M in one of his highest years if I remember correctly). He served 2 years in prison, his fine was 600…

> Is that okay now that he is donating money to cancer research?

If someone was an asshole, but has decided to stop being an asshole and try out "being a nice person" instead — then your choice, as an onlooker, is between either encouraging them in their new take on life; or pushing back due to their past actions. Through your actions, you can choose to live in a society where "turning over a new leaf" like that is either incentivized, such that more assholes become not-assholes... or disincentivized, such that the assholes' takeaway will be "damned if you do, damned if you don't", and they'll likely not bother, and keep being assholes.

Clearly, one of those options is better for the public good than the other.

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#47

Post by lupire »

RC_ITR wrote: post #45
Stratoscope wrote: post #40

This reminds me of Jeremiah Denton, a POW in that same war who was interviewed on TV to explain that the prisoners were being treated humanely. As he gave the verbal answers his captors expected, he blinked his eyes in Morse Code: – ––– •–• – ••– •–• • T O R T U R E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rufnWLVQcKg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Denton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_code Epilog: A few years ag…

> It made me think how so few of us in each country really wanted to fight these wars. Well, counterpoint: it really shows how China’s ascent has made for strange bedfellows.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#48

Post by lupire »

derefr wrote: post #46
dvt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Santa Monica and often walk past the Lowell Milken Family Foundation (which is close to the posh downtown). I always kind of smile and think about the story of how the Milken Family completely reinvented itself. Michael Milken, for context, was paid the highest yearly salary in the history of the world (~250M in one of his highest years if I remember correctly). He served 2 years in prison, his fine was 600…

> Is that okay now that he is donating money to cancer research? If someone was an asshole, but has decided to stop being an asshole and try out "being a nice person" instead — then your choice, as an onlooker, is between either encouraging them in their new take on life; or pushing back due to their past actions. Through your actions, you can choose to live in a society where "turning over a new leaf" like that is e…

No post body was provided.

Re: The Incredibly Stupid One

#49

Post by refurb »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #39
chasil wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have often wondered if, had the Watergate break-in not been discovered or reported, South Vietnam might yet exist, and if they would rival South Korea in their technological accomplishments.

South Vietnam never had a functioning government.

Not really true unless your standard is Western style democracy. And I can't think of too many developing countries who went from dictatorship to full democracy while fighting an insurgency/superpower proxy war. South Korea, Taiwan were both dictatorships for decades after the fighting ended.

The peak of the Southern government was '71-72, prior to the Easter Offensive by the North. The Tet Offensive had destroyed the Viet Cong in the South (needed to be entirely back filled by the Northern troops), so at that point the RVN had full control over much of the South. The fighting had died down to the point that work on social programs like land reform, actually install competent provincial leaders, etc had an opportunity to improve the life of the average citizens in the countryside (the major cities saw little violence over the war with the exception of Tet and a few other attacks).

RVN wasn't a democracy by Western standards, but it was a government that could at least provide security, development and work towards building up the country.

When the Eastern Offensive happened, the US was limited to air power (all troops had left by ‘73 but the drawdowns started in ‘69), and the ARVN made a good showing at the battle of An Loc. They were capable of being an effective fighting force but needed US support to counter the USSR and Chinese support the North was getting.

After '72, Congress cut off all aid, Nixon was in no position to force things otherwise (i.e. Watergate) and the writing was on the wall since the South didn't even have enough gasoline for their military vehicles.

The South was a corrupt government with plenty of nepotism and stealing of US funds, but if you visit Vietnam today you’d realize not much has changed on that end.

Post reply on HN