  |
|
| |
|
|
|
 Remember VietnamPosted on Sep 4, 2007WASHINGTON—Good Morning, Vietnam. The most fascinating aspect of George W. Bush’s no-holds-barred campaign to keep Congress from meddling in his foolish and tragic war is the way he has begun invoking the Vietnam War—not as a cautionary lesson about hubris and futility, but as a reason to push ahead (whatever “ahead” might mean) in Iraq. Say what you want about the man, but he’s full of surprises—and I’m not talking about the unannounced visit he made Monday to Anbar province. With the pivotal report from Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker due to land next week, and with the Iraqi government having made zero progress on political reconciliation, it’s no surprise that the Decider would decide to be photographed touring the one part of Iraq where he can claim any measure of success. But seeking support for the war in Iraq by reminding the nation about Vietnam? I’d feel better if I thought this was just some exquisitely subtle, deeply cynical gambit, yet I have the sinking feeling that Bush actually believes the nonsensical version of history he’s peddling. I fear the man is on a mission to rewrite the past. Last month, Bush told the Veterans of Foreign Wars at its Kansas City convention that “one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like ‘boat people,’ ‘re-education camps’ and ‘killing fields.’ ” He added: “Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price for American credibility—but the terrorists see it differently.” Lest anyone think this was merely a random rhetorical spasm, outgoing White House political czar Karl Rove wrote an article in the conservative National Review last week that included this passage: “If the outcome (in Iraq) is like what happened in Vietnam after America abandoned our allies and the region descended into chaos, violence and danger, history’s judgment will be harsh. History will see President Bush as right, and the opponents of his policy as mistaken—as George McGovern was in his time.” What? For the record, the illegal U.S. bombing of Cambodia destabilized that country and boosted the Khmer Rouge, who eventually took power and exterminated those “millions” in the “killing fields.” The monstrous Khmer Rouge regime was finally ousted by ... none other than the communists who took power in Vietnam after the American withdrawal. Oh, and it was Richard Nixon who negotiated and began the U.S. pullout. Gerald Ford presided over the fall of Saigon. Both of them were Republicans, as I recall. And George McGovern, who never got to be president, was right. Bush, Rove, Dick Cheney and the other principal architects of the Iraq war never served in Vietnam—in fact, they went to great lengths to put distance between themselves and the military adventure they now describe as both necessary and noble. At the moment, though, I’m less concerned about their hypocrisy than their distortion of history. To say the United States should not have withdrawn its forces from Vietnam is to say that there was something those forces could have done—something beyond napalm, carpet-bombing, destroying villages in order to save them—that would have led to some kind of “victory.” Of course, Bush and the others don’t say what that special something might have been, because they don’t know. They’re seeing nothing but a historical mirage. Bush seems to want to return to a golden age when America confidently threw its weight around wherever, whenever and however it pleased. The problem is that no such golden age existed. American power has always had its limits, and there have always been some wars that simply couldn’t be won. George W. Bush wants us to remember Vietnam? Fine, then let’s remember those iconic images—the Viet Cong prisoner being executed in cold blood with a pistol shot to the temple; the young girl running naked and screaming from a napalm attack. Let’s remember how little we really understood about Vietnamese society. Let’s remember how wrong the domino theory proved to be. Let’s remember how much damage prolonging an unpopular war did to our armed forces and our nation, and how long it took us to recover. Thanks for the reminder, Mr. President. When you talk about “victory” in Iraq and the Petraeus report discerns a light at the end of the tunnel, we’ll think of Vietnam. Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com. © 2007, Washington Post Writers Group Previous item: From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Accomplished? Next item: Bush's Baghdad Shell Game Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
|
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By Conservative Yankee, September 9, 2007 at 5:13 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
99436 by farmertx on 9/09 at 2:34
“History is written by the winner is a good bumper sticker as well.
If you consider that we won in ‘Nam, you really weren’t paying attention.”
I suppose that’s the story pushed by the lords of information.
If you are speaking of soldiers, military might, and the five administrations who put their credibility on the line… we lost definitively. If you look at the forces of Capitalism (which IMHO runs everything everywhere) They won in a walk. Old Vietnam is gone. the principles for which they fought (our enemy) are as withered and disabused as those of the old south. “From each according to ability, to each depending on need” is a nice bumper-sticker too, BUT that principle has been replaced by Work 14/16 hours a day and sell stuff to the USA. The Vietnamese make our sheets, some of our clothing, toys, kitchen utensils, and radios for our cars.
Maybe the lesson of Vietnam is “In war no one wins” That’s a bumper-sticker I can use.
Report thisBy farmertx, September 9, 2007 at 2:34 am #
#99389 by Conservative Yankee on 9/08 at 5:12 pm
(Unregistered commenter)
History is written by the winner is a good bumper sticker as well.
Report thisIf you consider that we won in ‘Nam, you really weren’t paying attention.
Bradley was right about who would have been on trial.
I figure that is why it is always best to win.
By Dan Uu Noel, September 8, 2007 at 11:46 pm #
Actually, the neocons told us back in 2003 that Iraq would be very different from Viet Nam: since “they” would have no jungles to hide, “they” would be no match for our troops.
Now, we are learning that this war is similar to Viet Nam after all: it has hit a few rough spots, requires a long-term commitment and hold enormous stakes for our nation and the free world.
Did Bush mention the thick jungle that Al Qaeda has planted all over Iraq since 2003?
Love,
Report thisBy hippy pam, September 8, 2007 at 4:49 pm #
Rhyme Without Reason by Hippy/Harley Pam
Report thisSome friends who served in Viet Nam,talking who and what and why.Remembering the where and when after twentysome years gone by...From ARMY-the one they called the rat-Threw his shoulders back with pride-told us from his wheelchair of dark tunnels where gooks hide.....AIR FORCE told of brothers-just like Eagles-way up high-of falling,crashing,burning-
earning angel wings to fly...NAVY NURSE spoke quietly-She"d seen to many good men die-said the medics and her sisters could only turn away and cry...GREEN BERET spoke of cages and camps and guards and night-he spoke of missing brothers-he spoke of government lies-he said"let’s go see RANGER-at the V.A.-we’ve got to try-to talk to him.maybe this time he’ll do more than stare and sigh”...He’d once believed in democracy-in mom and apple pie-til pointing fingers and screaming words about making women and children die...MARINE finally spoke up-sad and strange-weird kind of guy..."YOU KNOW IT WILL NEVER BE OVER FOR US.WE GOTTA STAND TOGETHER AND REMEMBER.SEMPER FI”
PLEASE ACCEPT MY UNWORTHY TRIBUTE TO THE BEST OF THE BEST…
By Conservative Yankee, September 8, 2007 at 3:12 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
But when the enemy refuses to wear a uniform and does use women and children as combatants (as the VC frequently did)...well, shit happens.
Good bumper-sticker, poor history. The old men, babies, and women of My Lai were wearing uniforms. the uniforms worn by civilian non-combatants.
As to our bombing during WW II general Bradley said; “good thing we won, or it would have been us at Nuremberg.”
History is usually written by the winner.
Report thisBy farmertx, September 8, 2007 at 12:53 pm #
Re:#99294 by Conservative Yankee on 9/08 at 5:06 am
(Unregistered commenter)
I have to agree with Purplewolf and HippyPam.
Report this“Conflict” was used in some comments at the time.
The troops were blamed for the failure of military and political leadership.
You say you checked things out before you enlisted and then “they took me to Japan”. Was that your folks or the military, that took you there?
My Lai was a black mark against our side, no doubt.
But when the enemy refuses to wear a uniform and does use women and children as combatants (as the VC frequently did)...well, shit happens.
Civilians have always died in ‘modern’ wars.
Germany bombs London, Allies fire bomb Dresden and Tokyo, plus the A bombs to end the War.
Bad things happen in war. Thats why it’s called War.
Gen. Lee said that ‘It is good that War is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it’.
Something a draft dodging slacker such as the Shrub never learned, nor would he give a damn; it ain’t his butt getting blown away.
By purplewolf, September 8, 2007 at 12:25 pm #
# 99294 Conservative Yankee:
I don’t know what America you come from,however, Vietnam was raging on during all my high school years and it was always referred to as a “war” at that time,not after it was over with. Nor was it called a conflict,altercation or any other word except war. Some of my fellow students left school before graduation to enter the military, which was allowed then,to serve in the war. Three of them didn’t make it having died in a train-car collision in Georgia as they drove to their basic training during the 1969-70 school year.These people were still a casualities of war even, though they didn’t make it to Vietnam,they were going there. Another student tried to commit suicide when her husband was killed in Vietnam, leaving behind a baby daughter. So don’t say it was never a war.They had an active draft at that time and my parents,always held their breath as they knew this was an illegal war,just like Iraq is today.A WAR IS A WAR IS A WAR IS A WAR IS A WAR.PERIOD. Regardless what YOU want to recognize it as!
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, September 8, 2007 at 5:06 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Hippy Pam must have lived in a different United States than the one I lived in during the Vietnam conflict (it wasn’t a declared “war” until it was over)
My “older people” encouraged me to look deeply into what we were doing before I enlisted. They then gave me the straight poop about WW II which they had fought. Then they took me to Japan.
The “Baby-killer” thing was a reference to the My Lai Massacre It was real, babies were killed.
Nobody but nobody was a hero regarding the Vietnam war, unless it was on Charlie’s side. Never 9before now) was so much spent on so little gain. AND the lie is not all on the side of the administrations which got us in, and kept us in this wasteful exercise. The “anti’s had plenty of lies of their own… one of the things which made them to weak to be effective resistance.
Report thisBy hippy pam, September 6, 2007 at 3:22 pm #
I saw-first hand-how the government manipulated the average adult American in order to get support for the VietNam War.How the government made the older generation “lean on” the younger generation in order to get young idealistic men AND women to “buy into the B***S***.BE PATRIOTIC-FREE THE OPPRESSED-SAVE STARVING CHILDREN and on and on and on...THEN WHEN THE P.T.Bs. realized they were LOSING GROUND-THEY FED THE YOUNGER GENERATION LIES[baby killers,killing women and children etc etc etc]TO MAKE “THE WAR” UNPOPULAR.AND THE DUMB DRUG CRAZED IDIOTS “FOLLOWED THE LEADERS” AND BLINDLY PARROTED THE “NEW” PROPAGANDA-WHICH WAS EXACTLY WHAT THE P.T.Bs WANTED-AT THE EXPENSE OF THE BEST AND BRAVEST AND MOST LOYAL AND PATRIOTIC PEOPLE THAT I HAVE EVER MET.VIET VETS RULE!!!!
Report thisBy xyzaffair, September 6, 2007 at 10:54 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Winghunter, there was no real “winning” in that war. North Vietnam knew winning battles was not possible, so they used guerilla tactics. They knew the US would eventually tire of the fight, but they would not. The US public turned against the war because they began to see the futility of continuing.
Report thisBy targitted, September 5, 2007 at 5:45 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Winghunter
The media stabbed you in the back, your fellow citizens stabbed you in the back, Hollywood stabbed you in the back, historians stabbed you in the back, the college punks stabbed you in the back, Kerry stabbed you in the back and I’m sure the all-powerful, dirty, stinking hippies stabbed you in the back ... do you realize how much power you have given to others for a failure that you have sadly and tragically accepted as you own? The suits who sent you there betrayed you. They failed us all, and they continue to do so to this very day. That is the towering contradiction you need to deal with, accept and move on from ... you did the best you could. You did the best you could.
Report thisBy purplewolf, September 5, 2007 at 4:18 pm #
IF BUSHIT REWRITES THE HIS-TORY BOOK IT WILL BE A VERY SHORT ONE. IT’S A WONDER HE EVEN REMEMBERS THE NAME VIETNAM SINCE HE WAS IN AN ALCOHOLIC COCAINE INDUCED HAZE ALL THOSE YEARS.
Report thisBy Winghunter, September 5, 2007 at 2:58 pm #
Hey! shut UP and read it!
HOW NORTH VIETNAM WON THE WAR
http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm
Report thisBy Jimnp72, September 5, 2007 at 1:31 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
His “thinking” is seriously disturbed and delusional.
Report thisCongress is complicit in his crimes by failing to impeach him.
Iraq now IS the same as Vietnam CA 1969-an occupier trying to impose its’ will with brute force. The republicans were so wrong then and are wronger to continue to support (my apologies to the donkey) this donkey as appointed president.
By felicity, September 5, 2007 at 1:16 pm #
#98711 Your comment beautifully argues the real tragedy of war. Troops go home, buildings are rebuilt, country-sides return to life, but the pain and suffering of the human beings who lived it never go away.
Report thisBy Tim, September 5, 2007 at 12:48 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
It is a myth that the US fought in Vietnam to protect the sovreignty of South Vietnam against the Communist North. At the end of the French Indochina War in 1954, Ho Chi Minh’s forces controlled most of Vietnam. It was believed he would have won a free election. The US disrupted the election because Ho was regarded as a nationalist. The US created the client state of South Vietnam and claimed they were protecting them from takeover by the North. Even though it is highly doubtful an attack on US ships occurred, the US used the Gulf of Tonkin incident to send half a million troops in. Anyone who showed loyalty to the North was labeled Viet Cong. A South Vietnamese village was wiped out at My Lai for this reason. I am disheartened by the retributions that took place in Vietnam and Cambodia after the US withdrawl, but it was the ultimate result of a failed, brutal policy. Let us also remember that the supposed domino theory did not fulfill itself. China and Vietnam became enemies, and Vietnam overthrew the murderous Pol Pot in Cambodia.
Report thisBy boggs, September 5, 2007 at 12:36 pm #
It is pretty presumptious of our less then brave Commander in Chief to even utter the words Viet Nam, since he and all his cronies ran from any service to it.
Report thisThey put down Jane Fonda, but she had the guts to go there while the Texas “girliemen” played with the barstools, and plotted how to sell or trade more weapons to our future enemies.
By hippy pam, September 5, 2007 at 11:16 am #
I HAVE LISTENED TO “MY VIET VETS” WHO ARE THE MOST HONORABLE,LOYAL AMERICAN PATRIOTS AND THE BRAVEST PEOPLE I KNOW-Talk about the fiasco that was VietNam.I have heard them cry because idiots called them REALLY ROTTEN BAD NAMES.HOW THE F**K CAN BUSH*T EVEN BEGIN TO COMPARE THIS NEW MESS WITH THE VIETNAM MESS???OUR SOLDIERS DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD-THEY PUT THEMSELVES IN HARMS WAY BECAUSE THEY ARE TOLD TO OBEY ORDERS.LETS STAND THE BUSH*T GIRLS ON THE FRONT LINES...THAT WAR WILL BE OVER IN A HEART-BEAT.....
Report thisTHAT IS AN ACE ON THE LINE.....
By Winghunter, September 5, 2007 at 10:11 am #
Gullable is certainly the word...I can think of a few others but, it’s not worth the usage of the keys;
HOW NORTH VIETNAM WON THE WAR
http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm
Please people, wake up and smell what you’re shovelin’.
Report thisBy Alan, September 5, 2007 at 8:56 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sadly the comparison of Iraq with Vietnam if only for this reason. Decades after the Vietnam war people are still being born with grotesque birth defects as a result of Agent Orange. Likewise the people of Iraq will suffer the same fate for generations to come as a result of the use of depleted uranium weapons by the US military. The losers as always will be the innocent. They will carry this load long after Bush has disappeared from the face of the earth. I only hope that Americans will one day wake up to the crimes that their governments have bestowed on people who want nothing more than to live their lives free from fear. I regret however it is not in their psyche. Greed is all.
Report thisBy farmertx, September 5, 2007 at 6:31 am #
Eugene worries that Shrub might rewritehistory.
Report thisHe should also worry that drinking arsenic might cause death.
The only way the Shrub can hope to leave a legacy is for history to be rewritten.
He states in his interview with Draper that he knows he has taken an unpopular stance on Iraq. Wonder what the clue was?
But, he feels that the unpopular stance will be justified by history, as he will have left the world better off.
His leaving the WH is the only thing that will improve the world.
Spin control can only do so much in the harsh light of reality. But reality is something that Shrub knows nothing about.
You’d think a man that dodged the draft in order not to serve in Viet Nam, and then sat by, protesting an inability to stop “free expressions”, while a man who did serve honorably was smeared for that service, would be loathe to mention Viet Nam.
‘Nam is an area that the fog of cocaine and alcohol have erased from Shrubs’ feeble mind, so he doesn’t get the obvious connection.
Shrub should long be remembered as the result of the voter’s not paying attention and casting their ballots based on a few sound bites and smear campaigns.
The fact that Kerry had crew members coming forward saying the attack ads were all lies made no difference.
At the same time, no one wondered why not one person came forward to attest to Shrub having served in the National Guard. They couldn’t even pay someone to do that.
Shrub learned from Pigpen that the big lie, told often enough really works.
The fact that he has to sneak into Iraq speaks volumes of how well his surge is working. But that is his lie and he is sticking to it. And the lock step Republican’s are buying it, as are some clueless Democrat’s.
Hopefully the voter’s will remember. I will.
By FFURKS, September 5, 2007 at 6:10 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
This article hits 50% of the points, unfortunately, it misses some big ones.
We didn’t “abandon our allies” in Vietnam. Our “allies” pulled out as soon as American boots hit the ground. The French colonials were the “allies” whom we went to bail out. Eisenhower began our involvement with massive airlifts of supplies to French forces. When Eisenhower left the office to Kennedy, he told the new president; “I fear you will have to send ground forces to Vietnam, and when you do, I will come up froma Gettysburg to stand with you when you make the announcement.” The true lesson of Vietnam should have been; When your original reason for war ends, so should the war. We went to Vietnam to prop up a colonial system. The colonial system fell, we should have left.
...and lets discuss the “domino theory” was voiced by Eisenhower in 1954, but framed by Eisenhower’s own version of Karl Rove) The Dulles brothers (John Foster, and Allen Walsh) were attorneys for Standard Oil of New Jersey when Eisenhower tapped them to be Secretary of State Head of the new C.I.A. respectively. The Dulles brothers were called “traitors” by Supreme court justice Arthur Goldberg for their Nazi ties.
Vietnam was driven by private quest for power and an opportunity for economic gain. Monetary consideration was the reason the Dulles brothers advised their clients to “invest in Nazi Germany” this was the same reason they advised Eisenhower to “invest” in the crumbling French colony. Money alone should never be a reason for the United States to send their soldiers to war....unfortunately, since WW II money has been our primary reason for war.
There’s enough material here to do a doctorial theses, I won’t post it all, but for those interested scroogle the following:
W.A. Harriman
Dulles Brothers Nazi connection
Dulles Brothers Standard Oil of New Jersey
Then ask your selves WHY we have an airport in Washington D.C. named for these crooks!
Report thisBy THOMAS BILLIS, September 5, 2007 at 5:25 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bravo Mr Robinson.Where are the rest of your ilk.The major media outlets who allow this chimpanzee to rewritehistory and are terrified to challenge him.I never beleived that many members of the media were democratic leaning but the way this half a moron intimidates your colleagues I am now a beleiver.The most amazing thing is that this is recent history and your colleagues would not have to get off their fat asses to show how the speech he gave completely mangled history.This is not a Republican or Democratic issue.You are completely right.They just rewriteincionvenient history and your colleagues just let him do it.Let me just end where I began.Bravo Mr Robinson.
Report thisBy Miguel Nieto, September 5, 2007 at 1:24 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sadly most Americans are gullable and lazy. Gullable to accept what ever the Republicans, as well as the Democrates, say, along side what Bush and co. say. Lazy because they’re too Fing lazy to read history.
Report thisI was once a gullable lazy American. It took me leaving America (a place I never want to return to) to realize what America and Americans (mostly white Americans) realy stand for.
Will Americans wake up to the reality of what is going on in their country? Only a small percentage have and some will eventually. The rest will go on eating the bullshit Bush, the Republicans and Democrates, and their corporate media dishes out.
It all makes me sick!!!