Richard Nixon on Homeland Security President of the U.S., 1968-1974

Sub-sections under Homeland Security:
• Anti-Communism
• Other issues under Homeland Security

1969: Doing away with draft undercut antiwar movement

Vietnam had social and political ramifications that were not foreseen at the time. The war led to the abolition of the draft, and that in turn had sweeping consequences for many other aspects of American life.

In the fall of 1969, demonstrations against Vietnam spread from college campuses to the American heartland. Pres. Nixon tried in various ways to undercut the growing strength of the antiwar movement. The one that succeeded was to do away with the draft. In April 1970, Nixon announced that he was reducing draft calls to zero and was meanwhile increasing the pay for military service

Warren Commission was greatest hoax ever perpetrated

When the presidential tape was released [in 2002, we also heard]: "Well, we protected Helms from one hell of a lot of things," Nixon said on the tape, referring to the CIA Director. "Of course, this Hunt, that will uncover a lot of things. You open up that scab, there's a hell of a lot of things and we just feel that it would be very detrimental to have this thing go any further. This involves these Cubans, Hunt, and a lot of hanky-panky that we have nothing to do with ourselves."

OpEd: Accusation against Alger Hiss as Soviet spy were true

The "Hiss case" referred to Alger Hiss, the accused Soviet spy. As a young congressman Nixon had exposed Hiss by pursuing Hiss's fellow spy, Whittaker Chambers. The crucial evidence against Hiss consisted of some highly sensitive government documents which were proved to have been typed on the Hiss family typewriter. Forced to explain the unexplainable, Hiss expressed amazement on the witness stand, saying he would always "wonder how Whittaker Chambers got into my house to use my typewriter." The jury convicted him of perjury. But Dean's book purported to confirm Hiss's nutty conspiracy theory.

Decrypted Soviet cables were declassified in 1995, proving that Hiss had been a Soviet spy. 20 years later, the Dean version of history turned out to be another left-wing hoax.

OpEd: Used national security as alibi to protect cronies

Nixon "substituted power for law, to impose a standard of amorality." Today that power runs "dark" prisons in paid-off countries, where loosely defined "terrorists" can be tortured out of our moral and media sight.

Wha Nixon did was "demean the importance of national security by using it as a handy alibi to protect common burglars." What Bush did was to exploit real fears for our national security after 9/11 to protect and advance the [neoconservative] agenda.

1972: Unilaterally renounced use of biological warfare

1970: Developing ABM system led to ABM treaty with USSR

OpEd: Invasion of Cambodia led to 1970 Kent State killings

Kent State was hardly a placid campus before the Cambodian operation. The university had 21,000 students, and a sizeable SDS chapter devoted to making trouble. The events of May 4 were viewed by a grand jury, which exonerated the Guardsmen as having fired in legitimate fear of their lives. What is undeniable is that on May 2-4, these young men faced far greater numbers of students who were screaming threats and engaging in violence. When confrontations of that sort occur again and again, as they did across the country, it is inevitable that sooner or later a tragedy like Kent State will occur.

Supported missile defense as means to achieve SALT

Privately, Nixon argued that more important than the fact that the ABM would deflect such a missile strike was that it possibly could. An avid poker player during his navy days, Nixon told his friends that it was like an ace showing on the table. The irony inherent in the left’s attack of the ABM was that the Democrats opposed ABM because they believed it would not work, while the Russians opposed it because they believed it would.. The Kremlin feared the prowess of American technology.

Military power is still relevant post-Cold War

START treaty fatally flawed; we can't eliminate nukes

As long as the knowledge of how to build nuclear weapons exists, we cannot indulge fantasies about eliminating them from the face of the earth. A nuclear-free world would be a world safe for conventional aggression. And it would create irresistible incentives for aggressors to develop a nuclear capability covertly and thereby gain a decisive military advantage.

Unless a START agreement contains airtight verification provision, the treaty will not serve our interests. In the past, if verification procedures fell short of this standard, we could be sure about two things: the United States would observe the treaty to the letter, and the Soviet Union would violate it to the limit.

We need SDI because of Iraq's nuclear ambitions

The US must commit itself to deploying by the end of the decade a limited space- and ground-based defense against ballistic missiles through the SDI. With nuclear weapons and their delivery systems proliferating, we cannot count on the chimera of arms control alone. We need defenses

Two world wars proves US can't ignore events in Europe

Support modernists in Muslim world over dictators

We should support the modernists in the Muslim world, in their interest and in ours. They need to give their people a positive alternative to the ideologies of extreme fundamentalism.

Nixon Doctrine: assist countries combating internal threats

Gorbachev believed SDI arms race would bankrupt the USSR

His major objection to SDI, he insisted, stemmed not from economic or military concerns but his belief that if SDI went forward, there would be a massive spiral in the arms race that would inevitably lead to increased tensions between the Soviet Union and the US and destroy any chance for a new, less confrontational relationship. He made these points vigorously and persuasively, but there is no doubt whatever in my mind that his major concern was and remains that the huge cost of competing with the US in developing SDI would bankrupt the already strapped Soviet economy.

Kennedy wiretapped more people than my administration

Congress' War Powers Act is clearly unconstitutional

SALT: Negotiate from strength; require verifiability

1. We must establish a strong position to negotiate from, and we must bear in mind that it is better to have no agreement than to have a bad agreement.
2. Any agreement e make with the Soviet Union must not inhibit us from assisting our NATO allies.
3. Our dedication to strategic arms limitations must not leave the US with the sole option of killing millions od Russian civilians.
4. Any SALT agreement must be strictly verifiable by national means without the cooperation of the Soviet Union.
5. Arms control must never be pursued as an end in itself, in isolation from other goals. There must be linkage between arms control and Soviet behavior.
6. The SALT process must not inhibit the US from going forward with strategic programs that are (a) allowed under the agreement, and (b) important for the achievement of a responsible American strategy.

We must be ready with resources & will to use them

There are two aspects to national will. There is will as demonstrated by the nation itself, and there is will as perceived by the nation's adversaries. In averting the ultimate challenge, perceived will can be as important as actual will.

National will involves far more than readiness to use military power whether nuclear or conventional. It includes a readiness to allocate the resources necessary to maintain that power. It includes also a basic, crystalline faith that the US is on the right side in the struggle, and that what we represent in the world is worth defending.

Detente is understanding between opponents, not a lovefest

The capitalist system works on the basis of the profit motive economically. The Soviet system works on the basis of the profit motive militarily and territorially. When the Kremlin calculates that is has more to gain than to lose by an act of aggression, subversion, or intimidation, it will engage in such action.

Each time the West appears weak or irresolute, the potential cost of aggression falls and the Kremlin's market "demand" increases. Each time the East shows itself ready to resist effectively, the cost rises and the market dries up.

USSR tries to beat US by weakening our will

This is the Soviet strategy. They seek first to demoralize us so that they can then destroy us. They want to end World War III [the Cold War] not with a bang, but with a whimper.

1. They try to deceive us in order to disguise their intentions and make us relax our will;
2. They try to make us feel guilty and defensive, even about our most dramatic successes, so that our will is paralyzed;
3. They try to break our will by bullying us with threats and bluffs.

Soviets disfavor ABM because of US technological superiority

The Soviet objective was clearly to continue launcher construction and to limit the US ABM to as low levels as possible. The Soviets were interested in curtailing the US ABM, for the general reason that this was an area in which we had technological superiority, and for the specific reason that the ABM would interfere with their counterforce doctrine, since its primary purpose was defense of Minuteman.

But we did eventually succeed in getting an interim 5-year agreement limiting offensive arms coupled with the ABM treaty. The US added to the treaty: "If an agreement providing for more complete strategic offensive arms limitations were not achieved within 5 years, US supreme interests could be jeopardized. Should that occur, it would constitute a basis for withdrawal from the ABM Treaty."

Local force as important against USSR as strategic defense

In these situations it is not the balance of power in the arsenal that counts, it is the balance of power on the battlefield. If we are relatively equal to the Soviet Union in nuclear arms but the Soviets have 5,000 Cubans, or even 500 agitators and terrorists, where we have no countervailing force, then the balance of power on the scene is massively on their side.

Military superiority will not deter terrorism

In these situations it is not the balance of power in the arsenal that counts, it is the balance of power on the battlefield.

The Nixon Doctrine provided that the United States would supply arms and assistance to nations threatened by aggression, if they were willing to assume primary responsibility for providing the manpower necessary for their defense.

Urged "national security" defense for Watergate defendants

The tapes are candid beyond any papers ever made public by a President. They contain occasional profanities & harsh judgments on individuals. They also contain disclosures of a kind that are certain to inspire even stronger future controversy about Nixon's role.

The conversations are laced with references to "laundering" money and cash payments, to "coded" phone conversations and burglaries and break-ins and even, in one instance, to a Mafia-type operation. In that conversation, Dean had complained that the people at the White House were not "pros" at "this sort of thing. This is the sort of thing Mafia people can do."

Nixon: "That's right."

Dean: "It is a tough thing to know how to do."

Nixon: "Maybe it takes a gang to do that."

Maintain nuclear deterrent to meet threats to US or allies

• We will maintain a nuclear deterrent adequate to meet any threat to the security of the United States or of our allies.
• We will help other nations develop the capability of defending themselves.
• We will faithfully honor all of our treaty commitments.
• We will act to defend our interests, whenever and wherever they are threatened anyplace in the world.
• But where our interests or our treaty commitments are not involved, our role will be limited.
• We will not intervene militarily.
• But we will use our influence to prevent war.
• If war comes, we will use our influence to stop it.
• Once it is over, we will do our share in helping to bind up the wounds of those who have participated in it.

Count ABMs as defensive, not strategic weapons

USSR is cheating on nuclear tests; push for bilateral treaty

NIXON: As a matter of fact, there's been a moratorium on testing as a result of the fact that we have been negotiating. I've reached the conclusion that the Soviet Union is actually filibustering. I've reached the conclusion, too, that they may be cheating. There should be no tests in the atmosphere; that rules out any fall-out. But as far as underground tests for developing peaceful uses of atomic energy, we should not allow this Soviet filibuster to continue. I think it's time for them to fish or cut bait.

1947: Served in HUAC, House Un-American Activities Committee

In the end it was Nixon who let Hiss trap himself with his increasingly convoluted testimony and lawyerly avoidances.

1954: criticized McCarthyism as unfair and destructive

It was then that he began to criticize McCarthy and his methods, although without actually mentioning the senators name: "Well, why do we fight communism in the first place? Because Communism threatens freedom and when we use unfair methods for fighting Communists, we help to destroy freedom ourselves."

1948: Require Communists to register with government

At 35, Nixon was about to become America's most celebrated Communist-catcher.