Why Carville love Creveld

24 March 2006 | Vanity

[Racehorse]

Appearing on the 21 March Today Show with David Gregory and Laura Ingraham, James Carville with customary exaggeration and hyperbole said:

. . . Morton Van Kreveld who is the foremost military historian in the world says this is the most foolish military operation since Caesar Augustus in 9 B.C. invaded Germany. I assume he knows what he's talking about.  . . . ( Geoff Dickens transcript via Finkelstein )

Whether it be Carville's slip or the transcriber's faulty hearing, Morton Van Kreveld is Martin Van Creveld.

Why does Carvelle anoint the good professor with the mantle of such supreme, peerless preeminence?  Because it suits his political purposes. The good professor is held in high regard, no doubt, but not that high.

Creveld claims in no uncertain terms that our  foray into Iraq will end as Vietnam ended, with us slinking out of town clinging to helicopter skids.  He has gone so far as to call for the impeachment of President Bush.

For misleading the American people, and launching the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 B.C sent his legions into Germany and lost them, Bush deserves to be impeached and, once he has been removed from office, put on trial along with the rest of the president's men. If convicted, they'll have plenty of time to mull over their sins.

Costly Withdrawal Is the Price To Be Paid for a Foolish War

Easy to see why Carville wishes "Creveld" was a household name.

But in the same article, Creveld acknowledges what I've long held, that we're never coming home, and for good reason.  What he sees as a negative, I see as a positive.

First and foremost, such a presence will be needed to counter Iran, which for two decades now has seen the United States as "the Great Satan." Tehran is certain to emerge as the biggest winner from the war — a winner that in the not too distant future is likely to add nuclear warheads to the missiles it already has. In the past, Tehran has often threatened the Gulf States. Now that Iraq is gone, it is hard to see how anybody except the United States can keep the Gulf States, and their oil, out of the mullahs' clutches.

A continued American military presence will be needed also, because a divided, chaotic, government-less Iraq is very likely to become a hornets' nest. From it, a hundred mini-Zarqawis will spread all over the Middle East, conducting acts of sabotage and seeking to overthrow governments in Allah's name.

Creveld's biographical blurb from the U.S. Naval War College:

Martin van Creveld, born in the Netherlands, has lived in Israel since 1950.  He holds degrees from the London School of Economics and The Hebrew University in Jerusalem, where he has been on the faculty since 1971.  He is the author of fifteen books on military history and strategy, of which Command in War (1985), Supplying War (1977), and The Sword and the Olive (1998) are among the best known.  Professor van Creveld has lectured or taught at virtually every strategic institute, military or civilian, in the Western world--including the U.S. Naval War College.

Among Creveld's controversial positions found elsewhere is a prediction Israel will eventually lose to the Palestinians, and placing women in military uniform leads to the feminization and weakening of a nation's military power.

In no particular order, a sampling of Creveld articles found online.

The Fate of The State - 1996 (Army War College)

Into the Abyss - 2004

Through A Glass Darkly:  Some Reflections on the Future of War - 2000 (Naval War College)

Costly Withdrawal Is the Price To Be Paid for a Foolish War - Nov 2005

Interview with Martin van Creveld - 2002 (Foreign Correspondent - Australia)

How not to fight Terrorism - 2003 Center for unconventional security affairs

Modern Conventional Warfare:  An Overview - 2004 CIA

Dangers Of A Drawn Out War - 2003

[headsonpikes]

...Morton Van Kreveld who is the foremost military historian in the world says this is the most foolish military operation since Caesar Augustus in 9 B.C. invaded Germany. I assume he knows what he's talking about. . . .

LOL! THere have been no shortage of foolish military operations since Teutoburger Wald.

Take WWI's Western Front, for instance.

What ridiculous hyperbole.

[x]

Hitler and Napoleon probably made greater blunders. You could say something similar for other European rulers, like Charles XII of Sweden.

Martin van Creveld is a pretty familiar type -- the professor who writes op-ed pieces along with more scholarly works. Some hyperbole creeps into his popular writing.

I wouldn't dismiss van Creveld's opinions out of hand, though. He's generalizing on the basis of certain familiar cases: Vietnam, Algeria, Afganistan, Israel/Palestine. You can add Rome's imperial wars with the Germans, our Revolution, and partisan fighting against Napoleon and Hitler, I suppose.

If you can find a case that is similar to our war on Iraq, and had a more positive outcome than van Creveld's examples, you've shown where he's wrong. If you can't, he may have a point.

Maybe what it depends on is whether your enemy is entirely isolated, like American Indian tribes, or whether he can count on resources and support from outside the small areas he controls.