Skip to comments.Vietnam ‘Exit Strategy’ and Iraq: Déjà vu All Over Again? - (exactly! libs reliving "glory days!")
Posted on 06/28/2005 9:00:54 PM PDT by CHARLITE
During hostilities in Vietnam, U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000 at the end of 1967 and the beginning of 1968. From those days of the 1968 Tet offensive in Vietnam, to the close of hostilities in 1975, nearly 48,000 more American service personnel died. During that same post-Tet period, anti-war sentiment reached a fever pitch back in the United States. These statistics stand firm as a stark reminder of how a populace of an uninformed or misinformed nation can kill their own citizen soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen.
During this same post-Tet period, the senior North Vietnamese Commander, General Giap, realized just how this war could be won: he would let the American people destroy the morale of their own fighting men and women and subsequently make Vietnam a political defeat for the United States.
By 1968, NVA morale was at its lowest point ever. The plan for "Tet" '68 was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet '68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to negotiate a surrender. (http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Camp/7624/Generals/giap.htm
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War was about to end, and the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there were some VC killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA. They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead that they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month, and eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory they knew they could not win on the battlefield.
Remember, this decision was made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000.
So, we are experiencing déjà vu all over again.
Giap was right and the terrorists in Iraq know about his strategy.
During WWII, there were no cries of appeasement or withdrawal before the Normandy invasion took place; of course not it was a secret operation the world learned about only after it had successfully taken place. Nearly 1000 Americans lay wounded and dying on the beach in the first 30 minutes of battle there. The Normandy invasion lasted from 6 June to 19 August. 1944 and the allies lost 37,000 ground forces and 16,714 air forces during the battle. Still, after such a high cost of victory at Normandy, there were no calls for an exit strategy or immediate withdrawal from our combat with the Axis powers no one in Congress defamed the President or called for the resignation of the Secretary of War then again, that was the character of the Greatest Generation on the battlefield, and the supporters of that generation at home. (Go here)
Just imagine for a moment what it might have been like at home and in the halls of Congress if the anti-war, liberal, mainstream (or downstream) media had been present during the Normandy invasion.
As I write this piece, I have no doubt, that somewhere in Iraq a terrorist commander has already realized that all they have to do is continue these desperate IED attacks so that terrorist losses can be converted into political victories by al Jazeera, the American media, The House of Representatives, and the United States Senate. It may follow that the American people will once again fall victim to journalistic sensationalism to the extent they will eventually demand our withdrawal from Iraq and our defeat in the Middle East.
It is clear that only 10,000 Americans died in Vietnam up until the time of Tet 68 and that in the days that followed Tet, 48,000 more Americans died in Vietnam. I served in Vietnam. I hold the American protestors and the American press responsible for the additional 48,000 deaths in Vietnam. Certainly the enemy pulled the trigger, fired the rockets and set the punji sticks and booby-trapped American bodies but they were inspired to hang on for one more hour, day, week, month by the American people at home.
Our Armed Services cannot fight both the enemy and our citizenry. How many deaths will result from an announced exit strategy or withdrawal? What will be your share of the increased body count in Iraq?
About the Writer: Mike Doty of Florida retired from the Air Force and entered the private sector to form his own company. As a private citizen, he has lived in the Middle East for seven years. He contributes to several Internet sites and has been published by McGraw-Hill. Mike receives e-mail at email@example.com
But the leftists WANT to kill American soldiers.
Check out the thread below, which discusses an entry on the blog "Powerline".
Here is an excerpt (bolding MINE)
I entertained at a 50th anniversary party for a well-known feminist leader about 10 days after 9/11. Much of the liberal elite of the Twin Cities was present. I was wearing a little flag pin that elicited considerable mockery. In a post-performance conversation with 3 prominent DFL activists, they all agreed that 1) America had it coming 2) much of the rest of the world cheered the attacks and that was not a bad thing; 3) the attack was purely a "criminal" matter that required the issuing of indictments, but surely not a war, and finally and most horrifically, a direct quote, "At least we got rid of Barbara Olson."
These folks were identifying with the 9-11 terrorists because the attacks killed Barbara Olson.
Talk about intolerance?
I would like the identify of the clueless excuse for a journalist who came up with the idiotic term "exit strategy." I have his exit strategy right here.
Once and for all, any of you liberal media mopes who might be lurking on Free Republic, the only exit strategy is victory! What part of that don't you understand?
Oh they understand .. but "victory" for the evil America is not their agenda.
Mark Levin was ingenious on his radio show tonight. He put out the question: "What is our exit strategy in the war on poverty?" He then proceeded to compare and contrast what the liberals say about the "failed" war in Iraq versus what they say about the (clearly failed) war on poverty. The stuttering and stammering and hypocrisy of the liberal callers was breathtaking. You had to hear the show to fully appreciate it, but believe me, Mark was brilliant!
and contrary to what Kronkite et al were "reporting" every night, we never lost a major battle in the Viet Nam war.
PS I hope that before GWB goes to Viet Nam next year he will DEMAND an accounting of ALL the American POW's & MIA's.
This is one of the single best pieces I've read. This is the real truth about the anti-war crowd--they are killing our soldiers.
The MSM has launched TET 2005.