thedrifter
10-13-05, 04:26 AM
Iraq and Vietnam: Al Qaeda is Right
Written by Brian Melton
Thursday, October 13, 2005
“When war does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the
scabbard.”
- General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson
I’m about to do something that may be a little impolite according to the standard American mind: I’m about to argue that one of our bitterest enemies is right, dead right, in something he has said about the U.S. Is that a real problem? Personally, I think not. It is foolishness to refuse to recognize (and then deal with) the truth, especially regarding war. We might not like to hear it, but its too important not to.
Just recently, the news media revealed that Al Qaeda’s number two man, Aymen al-Zawahiri, expects that the U.S. might just cut and run from Iraq, much like we did in Vietnam. If we do, he argues, they must be ready to fill in the gap. Now, this makes some patriotic Americans bristle all over, but I’m afraid he’s right. There are three major issues of concern (realities, if you will) for Americans in this: 1. America did run from Vietnam, 2. We are in danger of doing it again, and 3. It is the worst possible outcome for not only Iraq but the entire war on terror.
Taking these points one at a time:
1. Whatever your history teachers or PBS documentaries may have told you, America did not “lose” Vietnam. We gave up. Regardless of how the war was fought (and under Johnson stupidity beyond belief was the rule), America dealt out far more punishment to the enemy, even in the infamous Tet Offensive, than the enemy ever inflicted upon us.
So how did we lose? The North Vietnamese successfully used our own media, population, and “enlightened” attitudes against us. They convinced the peace movement and millions of others that the war was not only lost but against a moral and upstanding people who wanted nothing more than to reunite their country. This made the whole war look like a pointless waste of American lives. The pressure to pull out began to build, hampering even sensible military plans (like Nixon’s Christmas bombing campaign). It then became a self-fulfilling prophecy: We do not allow our military the ability to win, and then take losses as evidence that the war was pointless to begin with.
Whatever you may think of our original reasons for being in Vietnam, when the U.S. left, we did so because we chose to quit, not because we had to.
2. We see around us today the very same pressures mounting against the Bush administration, and they can have the same results if heeded. American Liberals are using the same tactics and strategies they did in Vietnam, and they are gaining ground regarding the Iraq War.
In a variation from Vietnam, they first try to make themselves out to be the friends and defenders of our military. (Never mind that one major reason our troops have insufficient armor and weapons is the fact that Liberals have been hacking away at the military budget every chance they get.) They demand to know why someone in the military might be expect to risk their lives in a war? After all, the military is really about nothing more than education benefits, right? More importantly, though, they presume the moral equivalence of both sides. Why should we oust Hussein when we are just as “bad” as he is? If both sides are morally equal, then Bush must have an ulterior motive. This of course makes good, God-fearing people approach the war as nothing more than a waste of American blood in search of oil, or gold, or whatever.
What we should be concerned about, though, is that increasingly, it seems to be working. As the pressure mounts on the President to pull our troops out, the military will be forced to fight the war with one hand tied behind it, suffer higher casualties, and this will then be used to reinforce the idea that the war is a failure.
3. Finally, pulling out of Iraq is the worst outcome possible at this point. Whatever we may think of the war’s causes, whether we should have started it or not, we’re in it. To pull out now would be perceived as a huge victory for Al Qaeda, who would find a way to topple the friendly government in Iraq as quickly as North Vietnam conquered the South. If we allow that to happen, we will be in an even worse position than before.
Al Qaeda will be reinvigorated by a stunning victory over the U.S.; Iran and North Korea will be reminded that we aren’t invincible, and they will have found another new ally in their rebuilt Iraq.
Another point worthy of mention is that many times the best defense is a good offense. As Jackson observed, it is never a good idea to fight a war halfway. One reason why we have not seen more terrorist attacks in the U.S. since September 11th is that the war is now being fought in far away places like Afghanistan and Iraq. Resources and manpower that would otherwise have been used to attack America itself have been diverted to attack us elsewhere. It is a simple fact that if we do not take the fight to them, on their soil, they will bring it home to us in ever more deadly ways.
All of these reasons, and many more, point to the clear, unavoidable fact that if we pull out of Iraq under these circumstances, all Hell may well follow. It might take a day, a month, a year, or a decade, but it will reinforce a precedent we could not afford to set in the first place.
About the Writer: Brian Melton is an assistant professor of history at Liberty University. Brian receives e-mail at bmelton@liberty.edu
Ellie
Written by Brian Melton
Thursday, October 13, 2005
“When war does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the
scabbard.”
- General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson
I’m about to do something that may be a little impolite according to the standard American mind: I’m about to argue that one of our bitterest enemies is right, dead right, in something he has said about the U.S. Is that a real problem? Personally, I think not. It is foolishness to refuse to recognize (and then deal with) the truth, especially regarding war. We might not like to hear it, but its too important not to.
Just recently, the news media revealed that Al Qaeda’s number two man, Aymen al-Zawahiri, expects that the U.S. might just cut and run from Iraq, much like we did in Vietnam. If we do, he argues, they must be ready to fill in the gap. Now, this makes some patriotic Americans bristle all over, but I’m afraid he’s right. There are three major issues of concern (realities, if you will) for Americans in this: 1. America did run from Vietnam, 2. We are in danger of doing it again, and 3. It is the worst possible outcome for not only Iraq but the entire war on terror.
Taking these points one at a time:
1. Whatever your history teachers or PBS documentaries may have told you, America did not “lose” Vietnam. We gave up. Regardless of how the war was fought (and under Johnson stupidity beyond belief was the rule), America dealt out far more punishment to the enemy, even in the infamous Tet Offensive, than the enemy ever inflicted upon us.
So how did we lose? The North Vietnamese successfully used our own media, population, and “enlightened” attitudes against us. They convinced the peace movement and millions of others that the war was not only lost but against a moral and upstanding people who wanted nothing more than to reunite their country. This made the whole war look like a pointless waste of American lives. The pressure to pull out began to build, hampering even sensible military plans (like Nixon’s Christmas bombing campaign). It then became a self-fulfilling prophecy: We do not allow our military the ability to win, and then take losses as evidence that the war was pointless to begin with.
Whatever you may think of our original reasons for being in Vietnam, when the U.S. left, we did so because we chose to quit, not because we had to.
2. We see around us today the very same pressures mounting against the Bush administration, and they can have the same results if heeded. American Liberals are using the same tactics and strategies they did in Vietnam, and they are gaining ground regarding the Iraq War.
In a variation from Vietnam, they first try to make themselves out to be the friends and defenders of our military. (Never mind that one major reason our troops have insufficient armor and weapons is the fact that Liberals have been hacking away at the military budget every chance they get.) They demand to know why someone in the military might be expect to risk their lives in a war? After all, the military is really about nothing more than education benefits, right? More importantly, though, they presume the moral equivalence of both sides. Why should we oust Hussein when we are just as “bad” as he is? If both sides are morally equal, then Bush must have an ulterior motive. This of course makes good, God-fearing people approach the war as nothing more than a waste of American blood in search of oil, or gold, or whatever.
What we should be concerned about, though, is that increasingly, it seems to be working. As the pressure mounts on the President to pull our troops out, the military will be forced to fight the war with one hand tied behind it, suffer higher casualties, and this will then be used to reinforce the idea that the war is a failure.
3. Finally, pulling out of Iraq is the worst outcome possible at this point. Whatever we may think of the war’s causes, whether we should have started it or not, we’re in it. To pull out now would be perceived as a huge victory for Al Qaeda, who would find a way to topple the friendly government in Iraq as quickly as North Vietnam conquered the South. If we allow that to happen, we will be in an even worse position than before.
Al Qaeda will be reinvigorated by a stunning victory over the U.S.; Iran and North Korea will be reminded that we aren’t invincible, and they will have found another new ally in their rebuilt Iraq.
Another point worthy of mention is that many times the best defense is a good offense. As Jackson observed, it is never a good idea to fight a war halfway. One reason why we have not seen more terrorist attacks in the U.S. since September 11th is that the war is now being fought in far away places like Afghanistan and Iraq. Resources and manpower that would otherwise have been used to attack America itself have been diverted to attack us elsewhere. It is a simple fact that if we do not take the fight to them, on their soil, they will bring it home to us in ever more deadly ways.
All of these reasons, and many more, point to the clear, unavoidable fact that if we pull out of Iraq under these circumstances, all Hell may well follow. It might take a day, a month, a year, or a decade, but it will reinforce a precedent we could not afford to set in the first place.
About the Writer: Brian Melton is an assistant professor of history at Liberty University. Brian receives e-mail at bmelton@liberty.edu
Ellie