Coleen Rowley: Drawing parallels from the past
Vietnam vis-à-vis Iraq in Congressional Debate: Lessons Learned? Or Biases Deeply Ingrained?
by Coleen Rowley
What, if anything, can be made of the fact that contemporary warhawks rely less on pragmatic analysis of current facts on the ground in Iraq than their prior personally traumatizing experiences in Vietnam?
Whether or not you think there are parallels between the Vietnam and Iraq Wars, the significance cannot be denied of the Vietnam experience nearly 40 years ago in producing two very opposite schools of thought among current congressional leaders. Views on what to do about Iraq seem to divide members of congress substantially based on how they processed their Vietnam experience, since each side's set of "lessons learned" is in direct opposition with the other's.
(The rest is here.)
by Coleen Rowley
What, if anything, can be made of the fact that contemporary warhawks rely less on pragmatic analysis of current facts on the ground in Iraq than their prior personally traumatizing experiences in Vietnam?
Whether or not you think there are parallels between the Vietnam and Iraq Wars, the significance cannot be denied of the Vietnam experience nearly 40 years ago in producing two very opposite schools of thought among current congressional leaders. Views on what to do about Iraq seem to divide members of congress substantially based on how they processed their Vietnam experience, since each side's set of "lessons learned" is in direct opposition with the other's.
(The rest is here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
Tuesday, Senator Reid was on CSPAN with Lieutenant General Robert G. Gard Jr. (USA, Ret.) and Brigadier General John H. Johns (USA, Ret.) who were both active during the Vietnam conflict.
"GARD: You know what? The current situation is reminiscent of the spring of 1965 in Vietnam. Both the then-secretary of defense and the president knew the war was unwinnable militarily, just as our own military leadership has said over and over again, including General Petraeus, the war is not winnable militarily.
Well, we had a surge in March of 1965, 20,000 more troops to Vietnam. At that point, there had been 24,000 battle deaths in Vietnam. But because the president didn't want to be tarred with losing a war, we continued on for five more years and 34,000 more combat deaths, with an outcome we could have achieved at the time of the surge.
We're at a turning point like that now. To continue on, to continue when the violence is increasing -- we're not getting anywhere militarily -- is foolhardy and will have the same result."
Haunting forecast, indeed.
I have often found that people have a tendency to want to compare Iraq to Vietnam, but that may be more substantiate their own analysis than reality. Vox Verax’s comment comparing Iraq to Afghanistan is more valid. Wasn’t Vietnam more of a proxy war with Russia / China providing support while America was there in the trenches? With Iraq, it is largely a civil war with fighting for domination of the country. There may be some support from outsiders, but they are more likely private individuals rather than governments. Iraq also has outside agitators – al Queda – but large it is a civil war. They are fighting for who controls their holy sites, their country and their oil (you pick the order of these three).
Why should there be a comparison to Vietnam … why not a comparison to the first Gulf War? Or Kosovo? Shouldn’t we be asking what was done right and work to repeat those practices? The big difference in this conflict is that there is minimal international support for America’s actions.
Post a Comment
<< Home