FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Good Morning, Vietnam!

by DAVE LINDORFF

 

As the American Democratic primary campaign heats up with the addition of a general and second Vietnam veteran, retired Gen. Wesley Clark, it is perhaps appropriate, and certainly no surprise, that the situation facing the American invaders and occupiers in Iraq would start to truly resemble that earlier disastrous conflict.

It was only a last Wednesday that newscasters were reporting that things had been “calmer” in Iraq, with attacks seeming to let up. That, however, proved to be like the calm along the North Carolina coast just before the arrival of Hurricane Isabel. A day later, on Thursday, that deceptive calm in Iraq was broken by an unusually heavy attack on an American military convoy, which may have left as many as eight American soldiers dead and more gravely wounded. A few hours later, there was another attack, in which three more Americans were killed and several wounded. (The U.S. has been unusually cagey about the casualties in the first, larger attack. Eye witnesses had reported eight-10 dead, while an AP reporter trying to get to the scene was, suspiciously, fired upon by an American tank guarding the site of the attack. Meanwhile American military has not confirmed any deaths, suggesting that a cover-up may be underway, in which, as in Vietnam, casualties might be “moved” to later dates and attributed to other incidents so as to avoid evidence of a calamity.)

The Bush administration, clearly rattled now, both by the deepening quagmire it finds itself in in Iraq, and by the prospect (now that there’s a general among Democratic ranks making some of the charges), of increasingly forceful political attacks on its military and foreign policy fiascoes, has begun a strategic rhetorical retreat. All key administration officials, from the president on down to Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz , have begun backing off earlier assertions about weapons of mass destruction and links between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. Caught in a lie, they are hoping now that the notoriously ill-informed and short attention span plagued American public will forget what they were saying earlier.

They may be right in guessing that many people will just hear what they’re now saying, but certainly some key people won’t prove so easy to befuddle. You have to wonder, for instance, what American soldiers, who had gone to Iraq pumped full of adrenaline-inducing propaganda about Saddam’s complicity in the 9/11 attacks and his alleged preparations to nuke or poison America, are making of word from the president, the vice president and the secretary of defense that, well, they never really did expect to find those WMD’s and that well, they never did really say that Saddam was involved in 9/11. What, many of them must be wondering, including the over 100,000 now dodging RPGs and mortars in Iraq, and the thousands now hospitalized with missing eyes, legs or arms, what, the family members of the several hundred dead soldiers must be wondering, have they been fighting for?

If it was not for post-9/11 vengeance and to prevent a WMD attack on America that they have been sweating, fighting and dying, then what? It couldn’t have just been to overthrow an evil tyrant, or why would Iraqis be so angry at them?

And what about the rest of us? Now that Bush and his war cabinet are admitting that they snookered us into supporting a war under false pretenses, what are we to think? Do we go with the idea that, well, mistakes were made, lies and exaggerations were fed to us, but now there’s this big mess in Iraq, and we can’t leave, we just have to keep paying through the nose and watching our soldiers get picked off–seemingly in bigger and bigger numbers?

That’s kind of what happened in Nam, remember? By 1968, when Nixon came in with his “secret plan” to end the conflict in Indochina, it was clear that the reason given for the war–fighting the spread of Communism–was a fraud or, if true, a failure. The war, if anything, was spreading the fires of Communism and anti-imperialist nationalism through Laos and Cambodia, and South Vietnam itself was a lost cause. Under Nixon, the refrain became not defeating the Communist insurgency, but “peace with honor.”

Actually, what “peace with honor” meant was giving Nixon some kind of a fig leaf to hide his shame when America finally pulled up stakes and gave up the fight. Providing Nixon with that little bit of greenery ended up costing an extra 20,000 American and perhaps up to a million extra Vietnamese, Khmer and Lao lives.

Now the situation in Iraq is starting to look the same, even if the numbers of dead, so far, are mercifully much lower on both sides.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the longer the U.S. stays in Iraq, the bigger the insurgency against the occupation will become, and the higher the casualty figures will mount.

Bush’s plan has to be to keep those casualties down, while tamping down the insurgency temporarily, with increased firepower, through the November, ’04 presidential election. Like Nixon before him, he cannot give up now, because the American public would then hold him responsible for the pointless deaths of its soldiers and for the incredible waste of over $200 billion in taxpayer money.

Definition of Quagmire: a swamp from which there is no escape, because the more you struggle, the deeper you sink into the muck.

So once again, we pursue a bloody strategy of “peace with honor,” this time euphemistically called “the rebuilding of Iraq.” We’ll pursue this criminal strategy not because it has a chance of working, but because our unelected president doesn’t have the huevos to tell the American people that he and his neo-con advisers made a colossal mistake.

It is then up to the public, and to the Democratic presidential candidates, to put a halt to this criminal madness. Don’t expect too much from the Democratic presidential candidates–at least not from the so-called front-runners. They may blast Bush for starting the war, but except for the likes of Kucinich, Sharpton and Moseley-Braun, they won’t be calling for an immediate end to the occupation. Before any of them develops the spine to issue such a call, they’ll need to hear a public outcry.

That makes the coming October 25 march on Washington, so reminiscent of the 1967 march on the Pentagon (something I remember well, having been arrested and beaten by Federal martials on the mall of the Pentagon, and locked up in Occaquan Federal Detention Center on that former occasion), so important. Coming as it does on the run-up to the first presidential primaries, a big turnout should give those timid Democratic presidential wannabes some more spine, while boosting the chances of those candidates who are willing to come out more strongly, demanding an end to the war and occupation.

Unless we want another president to drag on the occupation through another four- year-term looking for “peace with honor,” unless we want to wake up for four more years to “Good morning, Iraq!”, the Democratic 2004 campaign battle cry needs to become the slogan of the October march: “Bring the troops home!”

DAVE LINDORFF is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. A collection of Lindorff’s stories can be found here: http://www.nwuphilly.org/dave.html

 

More articles by:

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of ThisCantBeHappening!, an online newspaper collective, and is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

Weekend Edition
February 23, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Richard D. Wolff
Capitalism as Obstacle to Equality and Democracy: the US Story
Paul Street
Where’s the Beef Stroganoff? Eight Sacrilegious Reflections on Russiagate
Jeffrey St. Clair
They Came, They Saw, They Tweeted
Andrew Levine
Their Meddlers and Ours
Charles Pierson
Nuclear Nonproliferation, American Style
Joseph Essertier
Why Japan’s Ultranationalists Hate the Olympic Truce
W. T. Whitney
US and Allies Look to Military Intervention in Venezuela
John Laforge
Maybe All Threats of Mass Destruction are “Mentally Deranged”
Matthew Stevenson
Why Vietnam Still Matters: an American Reckoning
David Rosen
For Some Reason, Being White Still Matters
Robert Fantina
Nikki Haley: the U.S. Embarrassment at the United Nations
Joyce Nelson
Why Mueller’s Indictments Are Hugely Important
Joshua Frank
Pearl Jam, Will You Help Stop Sen. Tester From Destroying Montana’s Public Lands?
Dana E. Abizaid
The Attack on Historical Perspective
Conn Hallinan
Immigration and the Italian Elections
George Ochenski
The Great Danger of Anthropocentricity
Pete Dolack
China Can’t Save Capitalism from Environmental Destruction
Joseph Natoli
Broken Lives
Manuel García, Jr.
Why Did Russia Vote For Trump?
Geoff Dutton
One Regime to Rule Them All
Torkil Lauesen – Gabriel Kuhn
Radical Theory and Academia: a Thorny Relationship
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: The Work of Persuasion
Thomas Klikauer
Umberto Eco and Germany’s New Fascism
George Burchett
La Folie Des Grandeurs
Howard Lisnoff
Minister of War
Eileen Appelbaum
Why Trump’s Plan Won’t Solve the Problems of America’s Crumbling Infrastructure
Ramzy Baroud
More Than a Fight over Couscous: Why the Palestinian Narrative Must Be Embraced
Jill Richardson
Mass Shootings Shouldn’t Be the Only Time We Talk About Mental Illness
Jessicah Pierre
Racism is Killing African American Mothers
Steve Horn
Wyoming Now Third State to Propose ALEC Bill Cracking Down on Pipeline Protests
David Griscom
When ‘Fake News’ is Good For Business
Barton Kunstler
Brainwashed Nation
Griffin Bird
I’m an Eagle Scout and I Don’t Want Pipelines in My Wilderness
Edward Curtin
The Coming Wars to End All Wars
Missy Comley Beattie
Message To New Activists
Jonah Raskin
Literary Hubbub in Sonoma: Novel about Mrs. Jack London Roils the Faithful
Binoy Kampmark
Frontiersman of the Internet: John Perry Barlow
Chelli Stanley
The Mirrors of Palestine
James McEnteer
How Brexit Won World War Two
Ralph Nader
Absorbing the Irresistible Consumer Reports Magazine
Cesar Chelala
A Word I Shouldn’t Use
Louis Proyect
Marx at the Movies
Osha Neumann
A White Guy Watches “The Black Panther”
Stephen Cooper
Rebel Talk with Nattali Rize: the Interview
David Yearsley
Market Music
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail