Bush Compares Iraq With Vietnam; PR Battle Begins
Originally published 22 August 2007
Two of the seven soldiers who wrote the NY Times editorial referenced below have been killed in Iraq.
The domestic PR war over Iraq is about to begin in earnest.
When the war in Iraq did not progress as quickly as the Administration had hoped, President Bush resisted comparisons with Vietnam. In 2005, he said, "I don't see the parallels."
But as this discretionary war has dragged on and on, he has relented. Almost a year ago, he conceded in an interview that the escalation of violence last October might be comparable to the Tet offensive, which marked a turning point in Vietnam.
Wednesday Bush is going one step further.
In a speech to the VFW in Missouri, Bush will argue that Iraq is like Vietnam ... but unlike Vietnam, we shouldn't pull out because our departure won't stop the killing. [Reminder: he did not serve in Vietnam.]
In other words: let's think of Iraq like a mulligan, a do-over: we caused a bloodbath by leaving Vietnam so if we don't leave Iraq, there won't be a bloodbath.
Like there isn't a bloodbath already? What do you call the massacre last week in Northern Iraq, the second largest terrorist act in modern times? This bloodbath, by the way, would have been unlikely had we not invaded in March 2003.
Someone should give Bush In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam, written by former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. But our President is a self-avowed non-reader. So, instead, give him a DVD version: The Fog of War. McNamara said Vietnam would not have been fixed by time or more GI deaths:
The secretary of defense was a key figure in decisions to escalate the war between 1961 and 1965, and he readily concedes that the assumptions upon which he and his colleagues acted were badly flawed. They approached Vietnam, he recalls, with "sparse knowledge, scant experience and simplistic assumptions." Victims of their own "innocence and confidence," they foolishly viewed communism as monolithic, knew nothing about Indochina, and were "simple?minded" regarding the historical relationship between China and Vietnam. They badly misjudged Ho Chi Minh's nationalism and consistently overestimated South Vietnam's ability to survive.
Why does that refrain sound so, so familiar?
They Just Need Time
But Bush will again claim that Iraq is "gaining momentum." The government just needs more time.
We've heard this stanza so many times it's becoming an off-key ear worm.
Moreover, it causes a lot of cognitive dissonance if you try to hold that tune in your head while reading the words of seven soldiers in Sunday's NY Times. They describe, in detail, "questionable loyalties and [the] Janus-faced role of the Iraqi police and Iraqi Army."
A few nights ago, for example, we witnessed the death of one American soldier and the critical wounding of two others when a lethal armor-piercing explosive was detonated between an Iraqi Army checkpoint and a police one. Local Iraqis readily testified to American investigators that Iraqi police and Army officers escorted the triggermen and helped plant the bomb. These civilians highlighted their own predicament: had they informed the Americans of the bomb before the incident, the Iraqi Army, the police or the local Shiite militia would have killed their families.
[...]
[W]e see that a vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we continue to arm each warring side.
Mr. President, please tell me how this last, highlighted, phrase jibes with your "this is like Vietnam" assessment. Did we arm North Vietnam? Right. I didn't think so.
America Wants Out
I don't know if we can lay it at the feet of last October's violence or something comparable to Chinese water torture, but America has decided enough is enough. CNN reports that almost 2-in-3 Americans oppose the war and almost 3-in-4 say "that even if Petraeus reports progress, it won't change their opinion."
That forthcoming report -- around 11 September -- is why Bush et al have launched a dog-and-pony show this month. After the VFW, he'll talk to the American Legion. All to try to reverse the tide of public opinion.
And he won't be doing that job alone.
Freedom's Watch, a new conservative group, is launching a $15 million advertising campaign -- television, radio and Internet advertisements -- in more than 20 states and 60 Congressional districts. The message: don't "cut and run" and don't "surrender."
And who is running that campaign? Former White House Press Secretary, Ari Fleischer. "For people who believe in peace through strength, the cavalry is coming," he said.
The conservative group is so new that the only Google hits for a search on "Freedom's Watch" is related to this news story. This "newness" is glossed over in the NYT, LAT, WaPo and CNN stories.
Those ads will be countered in 15 states by a grassroots campaign sponsored by Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, a broad coalition.
If you think things in Iraq are improving, look at this chart. It shows the projected loss of American life this year -- a 30% increase over each of the past three.
I'm not going to pretend to know "the answer" to Iraq. I opposed our invasion. But today America is the proverbial bull in the china shop: we have to figure out how to fix what we broke, or at least minimize the damage while we extricate ourselves from the shards.
To do that, we have to learn from history. Not try to rewrite it.
See The Tragedy of Unlearned Lessons, by Dr. Joe P. Dunn.
Originally published 22 August 2007