Crapshoot
Hypocrisy is the homage which vice pays to virtue.
--Francois de La Rochefoucauld
Bush's trip to Vietnam will be the second by a U.S. President since the end of that war. Interesting that both of those presidents had a clear personal exit strategy from Vietnam when they were young men.
Bush should now appy his war-avoidance policy acquired during the Vietnam era to finish the war in Iraq. His dedication to peace as a 60-yr-old should be even stronger now, especially after he's sent 2,800 U.S. soldiers to their deaths in a questionable, elective and unnecessary war.
The trip includes a visit to the Joint POW-MIA Accounting Command, where U.S. efforts include accounting for the 1,800 U.S. service members still missing from the Vietnam War.
There is a smidgen of hypocrisy in all of this. We in the U.S. agonize over finding and accounting for our lost military men, and rightfully so. Yet during Vietnam we bulldozed NVA Army and VC dead into mass graves without making any attempt to identify and record the enemy dead. This effort at identification was bypassed even though most VN corpses had identifying papers on the body.
Similarly in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is no evidence that our military records the combat deaths of our adversaries. The humane and legal route is at least to attempt body identification through document searches.
So, in the Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq Wars, the bodies of our adversaries become disposable and generic as soon as we kill them, yet we agonize over the fate of our war dead. Doesn't it seem logical to give our enemy the same respect that we desire for our dead?
Some recent estimates place the number of unidentifed dead from the Vietnam conflict at 500,000. The previous administration's explanations and understanding of that war were as muddled and unrealistic as the current administration's reasoning for the Iraq invasion.
Michael O'Hanlon, of the Brookings Institution, said "Bush is right to try to win." Great, a wonderful insight, but what is it you win? Bush approached this like a game of Truth or Consequences, but rather than winning the Cadillac behind door three, he may just win the box of Rice-a-Roni.
Winning a war should benefit the U.S., either directly or indirectly, but it should not simply benefit Vietnam, or Iraq or Afghanistan. I agree that Iraq and Afganistan are issues that can spill over into the region, and that terrorism throughout the region will be enhanced. But why didn't somebody figure this out before the elective invasion? I refuse to call it "preemptive," as the only thing it preempted was our national security. The region was more secure when Saddam was in power.
GWB gambled, putting the reputation of America on the table to further his questionable agenda. Now he doesn't want to give up the chips. In gambling, this is called throwing good money after bad.
If money is seen as freedom chips, we don't have unlimited chips to squander. At some point, the croupier will be dealing out more than he is taking in, and the bank will be broken. Of course, we do have the military bodies to squander because our brave soldiers obviously do not have other priorities or personal exit strategies, unlike our maximum leaders did when they faced their turn at the wheel.
posted by rangeragainstwar at 12:28 PM
2 Comments:
You make many good points in your article. I would like to supplement them with some information:
I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being usedby our forces as we speak.
If you are interested in a view of the inside of the Pentagon procurement process from Vietnam to Iraq please check the posting at my blog entitled, “Odyssey of Armements”
The Pentagon is a giant, incredibly complex establishment,budgeted in excess of $500B per year. The Rumsfelds, the Adminisitrations and the Congressmen come and go but the real machinery of policy and procurement keeps grinding away, presenting the politicos who arrive with detail and alternatives slanted to perpetuate itself.
How can any newcomer, be he a President, a Congressman or even the Sec. Def. to be - Mr. Gates- understand such complexity, particulary if heretofore he has not had the clearance to get the full details?
Answer- he can’t. Therefor he accepts the alternatives provided by the career establishment that never goes away and he hopes he makes the right choices. Or he is influenced by a lobbyist or two representing companies in his district or special interest groups.
From a practical standpoint, policy and war decisions are made far below the levels of the talking heads who take the heat or the credit for the results.
This situation is unfortunate but it is ablsolute fact. Take it from one who has been to war and worked in the establishment.
This giant policy making and war machine will eventually come apart and have to be put back together to operate smaller, leaner and on less fuel. But that won’t happen unitil it hits a brick wall at high speed.
We will then have to run a Volkswagon instead of a Caddy and get along somehow. We better start practicing now and get off our high horse. Our golden aura in the world is beginning to dull from arrogance.
Sounds like you're describing Rome and the British Empire, and we're next.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments.
I see why you need "rosecolored glasses"--not exactly cheery stuff we're discussing here. I like all of John Conlee's music (if that's where you got your name.)
Post a Comment
<< Home