Posted on 08/16/2008 3:47:50 PM PDT by Publius804
After 23 years in the Army, the West Point graduate retired as a colonel and has been teaching international relations and history at Boston University. Bacevich has published several acclaimed books, including this one, THE NEW AMERICAN MILITARISM. His latest, published this week, is THE LIMITS OF POWER: THE END OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM.
He's with me now. Welcome to the JOURNAL.
ANDREW BACEVICH: Thank you very much for having me.
BILL MOYERS: It's been a long time since I've read a book in which I highlighted practically every third sentence. So, it took me a while to read, what is in fact, a rather short book. You began with a quote from the Bible, the Book of Second Kings, chapter 20, verse one. "Set thine house in order." How come that admonition?
ANDREW BACEVICH: Well, I've been troubled by the course of U.S. foreign policy for a long, long time. And I wrote the book in order to sort out my own thinking about where our basic problems lay. And I really reached the conclusion that our biggest problems are within.
I think there's a tendency on the part of policy makers and probably a tendency on the part of many Americans to think that the problems we face are problems that are out there somewhere, beyond our borders. And that if we can fix those problems, then we'll be able to continue the American way of life as it has long existed. I think it's fundamentally wrong. Our major problems are at home.
(Excerpt) Read more at pbs.org ...
I think that if a hard core leftest like Moyers likes him he can’t much of a “conservative”.
Right! And why would a conservative care about anything or anyone on Moyers’ show?
Don't know him never heard of him. But he prefaces this quote with the fact that the parties aren't different and they just say what they want to get elected. If so, then why vote Democrat in 2006?
I didn't see anything particularly revealing in his ramblings with Moyer. And with what Russia just did in Georgia makes his whole argument moot.
No surprise there ...
Ended at 23 years BECAUSE he wasn’t going to be a General.
Sobriety is a prerequisite. Sanity, however, is not.
I have known Skip Bacevich for years, both professionally and personally. He and I are contemporaries in both our professional and personal lives. We both experienced the emotional challenges of dealing with American defeat in Vietnam, a defeat of political capitulazation, rather than failure of military actions.
Skip and I left the emotions of Vietnam behind and turned our attentions to the real threat to world peace, the Cold War. He was a true Cold Warrior, dedicated to the defeat of the Soviet Union, both militarily and politically. To this end he became a political science intellectual and a true soldier of the Cold War standoff against Communist agression in Europe.
No doubt, he rejoiced in the fall of the Wall and the Soviet Union and expected that his years of dedicated service to the country would be vindicated by this significant event.
But, then came Saddam and the resurgence of Islamic Fascism. Skip was by then the Regimental Commander of the 11th Regiment of Cavalry, one of the Army’s most storied unit. He and his Regiment were late to the fight, arriving after we had brought Iraq to heel and liberated Kuwait. Skip and his regiment were given mundane chores while the warriors packed up their kit and went home. Whilst they conducted this unglamorous chore, a tragedy occurred: ammunition stored in the vehicles and in the motor park of his Regiment exploded, a number of soldiers died. Skip was relieved of his command, the kiss of death in today’s military.
He retired from the military and pursued an academic career, for which he was well suited. Then came the second Gulf War and the ultimate tragedy: His son was killed in action. Skip was twice personally injured by his country. His judgment has been understandably affected by these jolts to his life.
I admire Skip Bacevich, both as a soldier and as a scholar. I discount most of what he has to say.
I sensed in reading the transcript of the interview that he was a troubled intellectual. The losses he suffered must have played into his political philosophy. Then there is the environment at Boston College.
Some of what he says is factual. We are too indulgent, too consumer oriented, our government istaking the shape of an empire. The American people need to know this. These things being said, however require context. We have a near total failure of leadership in terms of academics, politics and morality. This, I believe is the legacy of the "60's. The student radicals, draft dodgers and the like have matriculated into professorships, positions of power in politics and government.
Where are we now? Our "elite" class eschews military service and goes to the highest bidder, lock, stock and soul. "Joe six-pack," the guy who just wants to go to work, feed his kids and pay his bills has given up all hope of making any gains.
We need to hear at what Col. Bacevich has to say, to take into account his suffering and to filter it through our moral values and come up with a renewed nation under God, with citizens who are engaged, who are willing to sacrifice for a cause greater than themselves, to understand that while we cannot save the world from itself, we can save ourselves by being the people God would have us be.
I agree with everything you say except for the notion that America is an Imprerialist power. I think that we are nothing of the sort. We have withdrawn from every conquest we have ever made from 1865 to the present day. Where we remain, we remain at the invitation of the soverign power and on conditions that they have laid down. We are, and have been since our earliest days, a trading power. When we use force, we use it to impose conditions of free trade and commerce. From this we have become the most powerful and most wealthly nation on Earth. Why would we wish to be imperialist - it just doesn’t pay.
My problem is that the government acts like an imperial government to its own people.
If he's a conservative, I guess Ralph Nader is a Reagan Republican.
I agree with that, but I wouldn't call it imperialist. Statist, verging on Facist.
Roger that.
Sounds like he bought into a lot of the Liberal crap., a real step down I’d say.
Thanks to both of you for this very interesting and informative dialogue. I saw parts of the interview and had lots of questions. The bio presented gives great insight into the man.
Your comments regarding Dr. Bacevich’s command of the 11th Infantry regiment don't jive with countless certified and uncertified accounts of Army History. The excerpts below wer taken directly from government websites. The websites are posted below the excerpts. The Army's account of the Kuwait explosion incident clearly states, “miraculously, there were no fatalities.”
Farther below is a time frame taken directly from the 11th Cavalry Regiment website(which is also provided). It clearly states Bacevich commanded from 1990 to 1992. If the motor pool fire incident occurred on 11 July 1991, why did it take at least five months to relieve Dr. Bacevich of command? Also, what was the reason for relief of command—a defective heater does not constitute grounds for relief of command. Was there a proven lack in the 11th’s motor pool maintenance practices? Please explain...your explanation seems very inconsistent with all other certified facts.
History from certified/authentic Army website: http://www.irwin.army.mil/Units/11TH+Armored+Cavalry+Regiment/11th+CR/
On the morning of 11 July a defective vehicle heater triggered a motor pool fire in the north compound of Blackhorse Base Camp. Despite valiant efforts to extinguish it, the blaze burned out of control and began detonating ammunition stored in and around the Regiment's vehicle fleet. The resulting shower of shrapnel and unexploded ordnance forced the evacuation of the entire compound and caused extensive damage.
Some fifty Blackhorse troopers suffered injuries that day, a number that would have been far higher had it not been for numerous individual acts of heroism and the Regiment's disciplined response to the emergency. Miraculously, there were no fatalities.
Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Commander-in-Chief of the United States Central Command, visited the Regiment. He presented the Soldier's Medal for Heroism to three Blackhorse soldiers:
Major Ricky Lynch
Staff Sergeant Charles Rogers
Private Eric Tomlinson
Dr. Bacevich’s term of Command along with his Command Sergeant Major's. Information found at 11th’s website: http://www.blackhorsetroopers.org/history.htm
54th Colonel A. J. Bacevich 1990 - 1992
12th RCSM Earl J. Williams 1990 - 1992
Centurion316, please explain your inconsistencies.
First of all, you refer to the 11th Infantry Regiment, which makes me suspect that you are an internet warrior and nothing else. Bacevich commanded the 11th Armored Cavary Regiment, as you subsequent comments note. They are completely different organizations. I will write it off as ignorance on your part, nothing intentional.
Skip Bacevich is a friend of mine. I don’t wish him any ill will, but the facts are that he took the blame for the incident in his motor pool, and paid the price after the investigation was completed. His career was finished: Tot as they would say at the Cheese Schnitzel factory in the Fulda Gap. The unfortunate fact in many of these events is that the powers that be require heads to roll, and he was Blackhorse 6. I don’t think that it was fair, I’m sure that he doesn’t think it was fair. But, that’s what happened.
BTW, don’t believe everthing that you read, including this. Facts can be very elusive, especially in official reports.
Skip Bacevich was a great soldier, and he is a distinguished intellectual in the academic world. I don’t agree at all with his take on current world affairs, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t respect him.
Now, unless you can do better than another Google search, I recommend that you move to a subject on which you are better informed.
Thanks for the quick response. Yes, the 11th Infantry Regiment was a typo. This was my OCS unit at Benning, so I guess that's how the slip happened. Andrew Bacevich Jr. was in this OCS unit with me, and he was a good friend of mine. I've followed and agree with much of what Dr. Bacevich has to say about our nation's political disposition. You might conclude my friendship with Andrew Jr. has encouraged a pro-Bacevich Sr. bias, but this simply isn't the case. If I thought Dr. Bacevich was pulling our legs, I wouldn't support him.
I questioned your information because this is the only time in 14 months of following Dr. Bacevich’s interactions with countless media mediums that I have heard any sort of relief of command explanation for his military exodus. I don't doubt a relief of command could have happened(and quite possibly did happen) given the severity of the motor pool accident(even barring deaths). I questioned your response because it seemed to directly contradict the Army's adamant report that there were no fatalities. “Amazingly, there were no fatalities” seems a little too brazen of a lie...even for the DOD. Do you have a theory behind this 180 degree denial?
If your explanation is factual, the Army lost a revolutionary general officer to a freak incident that could have occurred on anyone's watch. Knowing the kind of man Dr. Bacevich is, I have no doubt he would claim accountability for any incident within his realm of leadership. Though his entrance into academia may have been spawned by a tragic event, I believe Dr. Bacevich has provided much more as a scholar than he ever could have provided within the rigid confines of military obedience.
If your account of Dr. Bacevich’s Army career apex is accurate, I still don't believe his political leanings and arguments would be dramatically influenced by that tragic event. I'm sure higher’s recourse was a hard pill to swallow—not because Dr. Bacevich didn't accept responsibility, but because he understood the unlikely probability of his predicament—Dr. Bacevich is an intelligent and deeply thoughtful man. To suggest that he's held a constant grudge and moreover; that the crux of his political viewpoint resulted from bitterness attributed to the stunting of his military career is simply an insult to the man. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe anyone is infallible or insusceptible to emotional impulse, but the content of Dr. Bacevich’s character combined with his voracious and unsparing insistence to find an objective truth does not jive with the notion that he carries a grudge that determines his adamant political views.
After meeting Dr. Bacevich, after reading his books and articles, after listening to and watching his many interviews and testimonials, I insistently believe his disgust(or pessimism) with our political and military institutions is a direct result of meticulous observation, rather than a vain attempt to obtain revenge because “The Man” stunted his military career.
After Andrew Jr.’s death, Dr. Bacevich did not change one iota of the disgust he articulated in The New American Militarism, nor did he change the bent of his earlier writings and periodicals. His voice was ONLY amplified after Andrew Jr.’s death. Dr. Bacevich ALWAYS refuses to speak about Andrew Jr.’s death because he doesn't want to give the impression that Andrew's death serves as a proliferative impetus for the promotion of his political and military opinions.
Again, do you have any idea why the Army would have a reason to lie about the motor pool incident? I'm very interested.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.