Is Iraq another Vietnam?
You might be surprised at the answer.
by JohnHuang2
"Recent Iraq attacks on U.S. troops have demonstrated a new tactical sophistication and coordination that raise the specter of the U.S. occupation force becoming enmeshed in a full-blown guerrilla war," write Tom Ricks and Rajiv Chandrasekaran in the Washington Post this week, citing "military experts."
"The new approaches employed in the Iraq attacks last week," they write, "are provoking concern among some that what once was seen as a mopping-up operation against the dying remnants of a deposed government is instead becoming a widening battle against a growing and organized force that could keep tens of thousands of U.S. troops busy for months."
Translation? Iraq has become Vietnam.
Assessments were pretty much the same over at Reuters, which charged that "With each U.S. death in Iraq, President George W. Bush faces the potential of a growing political threat at home as Americans become more unsettled by the continued violence, analysts say."
"Bush, whose 2004 re-election strategy relies heavily on casting himself as a strong leader in a time of grave threats, could see that image damaged by the steady death toll or prolonged attacks on U.S. troops," adds Reuters. The glee from Reuters poured right out of my monitor and into my coffee cup. Yuck!
If Bush's "image as a strong leader" is "damaged?" He's finished. Forget 4 more years. In "times of grave threats," voters turn against weakling milksops, rallying behind genuinely powerful leaders, leaders with national security bona fides, whose unassailable credentials and proven experience inspires confidence and commands authority. Leaders like super-hawks Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun, Howard Dean and what-cha-ma-call-it (the French-looking guy) fit the bill perfectly. Kucinich, Braun, Dean and what-cha-ma-call-it (the French-looking guy) have attacked Bush throughout for being super-hawk. And for eschewing advice from the French, Kofi Annan, the E.U., Guinea, Cameroon, Samoa, Fiji, you name it.
A similar thing happened in 1972, during the Vietnam war, when U.S. troops were dying in significant numbers per week. In the fall, voters dumped milksop Nixon, pulling the lever for super-hawk Sen. George McGovern instead. Oops, never mind.
"`There is a public recognition that things aren't going well in Iraq,'" Reuters quotes Gallup's Frank Newport as saying. While "Administration officials say U.S. troops in Iraq are not facing a Vietnam-like quagmire," Reuters insists U.S. troops in Iraq are facing a Vietnam-like quagmire.
So, what's the truth -- is Iraq Vietnam or not?
My curiosity couldn't take it anymore. I've had it. I decided to hop on a plane over the weekend and see for myself. Up close and personal. Naturally, for security reasons, I can't disclose every detail of how I got there, but here's a thumb-nail sketch.
On a flat map, Iraq is 7 or 8 thousand miles from Florida. Strangely, by the time we landed, it felt like we had flown 12 thousand miles or more. Anyway, once we finally touched down (can't reveal exactly where, for security reasons), we grabbed a row boat. The humidity that morning was off the charts. Then came a monsoon rain. Forget what you think you know about Iraq topography and climate. The place was like nothing I'd expected. On each side of the sinuous river, we saw very fertile land, used for growing rice and sugar cane. It was hardly paradise, though. Nerve-wracking sounds of bullets and rocket-propelled grenades filled the air, choppers roaming back and forth overhead. Clearly, this was a war-zone. Yet, we were only miles from Baghdad.
Forget what you think you know about Iraq culture and society. Once in the capital, what I saw was like nothing I'd expected. The streets were glutted with traffic, mostly bicycles and motor scooters. And military vehicles. People here wear pointed grass hats, shaped like little umbrellas, not exactly traditional Arab headdress. (Incidentally, at the river on our way towards Baghdad, I even saw black-pajama wearing combat guerrillas.) The sidewalks teemed with merchants. If Saffron's your bag, you'll dig this place. Everywhere you go, somebody tries to sell you Saffron. Nearby was a place called the Rex Hotel, C.I.A. headquarters here. Buddhist Temples, not Mosques, were aplenty. Bet you didn't expect that, eh? People here (who, by the way, look oriental, not Arab) carry baskets of rice or buckets of water on bamboo shoulder poles.
Well, getting back to the main question, is Iraq Vietnam? In a word, Yes -- everything I've seen in my brief visit here seems to indicate that it is. Resistance is growing, from the jungles of Baghdad, to the foggy rice paddy fields of Basra, to the rubber plantations of Najah, to the swampland of Tikrit, across the glaring Iraqi green deltas, resistance is growing. Even along Iraq's infinite coastline, its coastal resort towns with its white sand beaches, inland to the Mekong River Delta in the south to the mountains of Mosul in the north, to the submerged Forrest of Falluja, resistance is growing. The "growing" resistance is "provoking" "growing" "concern among some" as a "growing number of military specialists" voice "growing" "concern" and "grow" "quietly worry" while "growing" guerrilla "activity in Iraq" grows "very unsettling," provoking even more "growing" "worry!" In short, the Washington Post, The AP, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Reuters, UPI, ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC -- they're right! We're doomed! Doomed, I tell ya! Quagmire! Quagmire! Pockets of resistance in Baghdad! Let's give up now! Pull out! Pull out!
Reported by Jayson Blair and Baghdad Bob deep in the tall rain Forrests of Karbala while time-traveling back to war-time Saigon.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Democratic president candidate the Rev. Al Sharpton [on Sunday] compared President Bush to a los Angeles gang leader and demanded that he apologize to the American military and their families for challenging dissident Iraqis to `bring them on,'" reports the Washington Times this week.
"`I'm in Los Angeles. For the president to say, `bring it on,' almost like daring and provoking [Iraqi death squads] to kill American soldiers'" -- and we all know Iraqis death squads would never kill American soldiers unless 'dared' and 'provoked' (it's just not in them) and, Bush, as Commander-In-Chief, should think twice before doing something as dumb as expressing full confidence in his troops, rather than politely asking Iraqi death squads not to attack (`'Don't bring it on,' please? Pretty please? Hey, terrorists have feelings, too, you know! Why make them mad?) -- "`he sounds more like a gang leader in South-Central L.A. than one that is trying to institute a policy of democracy and reconstruction in the world.'"
Lemme get this straight: Al says Bush sounds like an L.A. gang leader, correct? Well, it could be worse, folks. Imagine, just imagine, had Bush sounded like some cop from the "racist" L.A.P.D! Now that would be scandalous.
South-Central gang leaders, locked in combat with L.A.P.D. cops tonight, could not be reached for comment. Incidentally, Gen. Tommy Franks, famed South-Central L.A. gang leader, Monday sounded like Bush.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bring 'em on! says Rove
"Talk about lining up the competition. President Bush's chief political adviser has seen the possible presidential candidates among the Democrats and has found one he apparently thinks his man can beat: former Vermont governor Howard Dean," writes Juliet Eilperin in the Washington Post last weekend.
"Karl Rove tried to stir up enthusiasm for Dean marchers [Friday] at the 37th annual Palisades Citizens' Association Boulevard, which always attracts plenty of politicians," says Eilperin.
Dean, who's sweeping the country -- especially the South -- with wildly popular themes like gay civil unions and socialist `medicine' and the need to hike taxes and invade Liberia and defend Saddam (unjustly accused of banned weapons possessions charges), beat the rest of the '04 pack in second quarter fund-raising -- $7.5 million total -- a good chunk of it via the Web. The northeastern liberal's nearest rival, northeastern liberal Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, raised $6 million. Northeastern liberal Joe Lieberman lagged well behind. Northeastern liberal Hillary! says she has no plans to run in '04.
Eilperin: "As a dozen people marched toward Dana Place wearing Dean for President T-shirts and carrying Dean for America signs, Rove told a companion, `heh, heh, heh. Yeah, that's the one we want,' according to Daniel J. Weiss, an environmental consultant, who was standing nearby. `How come no one is cheering for Dean?'" asked Rove.
"Then, Weiss said, Rove exhorted the marchers and the parade audience: `Come on, everybody! Go, Howard Dean!'"
I'll say this. I've admired Karl Rove, his political skills and acumen are second-to-none, his wit and policy insights are big assets to the Republican Party. But with all due respect, this move strikes me as somewhat bone-headed. It hurt Dean's feelings, for one. But worse: Now everyone'll know it was Rove -- ROVE! -- who sent Dean all that late-hour campaign bonanza $$$ via White House computer! ;-)
Seriously though, don't kid yourself, Bush is vulnerable. Unless Dean gets the nod. Or Kerry gets the nod. Or Gephardt gets the nod. Or Lieberman gets the nod. Or Braun gets the nod. Or Sharpton gets the nod. Or Edwards gets the nod. Or Kucinich gets the nod. Or Graham gets the nod.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Meanwhile, the recall effort continues to ravish California.
"Just don't sign the petition," urges the San Francisco Chronicle in a lead editorial.
"There is little doubt that the recall drive is already contributing to the dysfunction that has enveloped the state Capitol," observes the Chronicle. "Republicans appear reluctant to do anything" -- not even raise taxes! -- "that might restore some of the governor's statute. Democrats, many of whom have had chilly relations with" warm and affable and amiable "Davis, are even less likely to turn to the weaken governor" -- he'd be powerful if only these recall petitions would let him -- "for leadership. The recall advocates' strategy seems to be to undermine the [blameless] Davis . . . to help the odds for the recall."
Why, to hear these evil right-wing Republicans tell it, you'd think this recall drive were part of the California constitution to hold goofball and crooked politicians accountable for their goofball and crooked ways or something. The recall "political circus...would allow pitchmen and clowns of all ideologies to have a shot at guiding our state" back from the brink.
"The opportunists who are considering the race have one thing in common: None has demonstrated an ability to move the hearts and minds of the masses on tough issues" quite like Gov. Davis has demonstrated.
GOP "gubernatorial wannabe Darrell Issa...has a resume that consists of two-plus undistinguished years in the House of Representatives." Can't say that about Gov. Davis. Ol' Gray has a resume that consists of five-plus very distinguished years in the Governor's Mansion distinguishing himself as the worst chief executive in California history. Quite an achievement, if you ask me.
"Arnold Schwarzenegger? Get real. Movie heroics don't count," mocks the Chronicle. A valid point. B-grade movie actor Ronald Reagan never amounted to much, certainly nothing as weighty as being editor at the Chronicle.
Face it: The recall petitions to recall Davis made Davis lie about the size of the deficit before his re-election last November, which is why today "the state is teetering on bankruptcy." The recall petitions, in just 3 short years, have given California the worst fiscal crisis in state history. The recall petitions allowed the midnight deadline last week to pass without a budget. Still, the recall petitions refuse to craft a budget. The recall petitions, only two years ago, spawned the worst energy crisis in California history, with blackouts up and down the state, thanks to the recall petitions. The recall petitions to recall Davis made Davis triple the car tax and call for $4.2 billion in additional tax hikes. The recall petitions, under cover of darkness, for years has been stealing state money, depriving nursing homes and hospitals and clinics of billions owed. The recall petitions are even sending out tens of thousands of lay-off notices to tens of thousands of state workers! The recall petitions have conspired to make governor Davis the worst governor in California history. This has to stop.
Free Gray Davis! Time to recall the recall petitions!
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Meanwhile, "Tony Blair has revealed for the first time that coalition forces in Iraq believed the war against Saddam Hussein would last for 125 days, suggesting why the military were so ill-prepared for the post-conflict situation," reports the U.K. Observer this week.
"In an interview with The Observer," observes The Observer, "the Prime Minister said he had spoken to General Tommy Franks, the commander of US forces in Iraq, who had said the war was likely to last four months."
Thought Blair was in trouble over WMD and `faulty intelligence'? His troubles have only begun. Winning the war in Iraq swiftly was, for Blair, politically damaging enough, but for him to `admit' he thought the war would last much longer "raises the question whether military intelligence understood the state of the Iraqi armed forces -- which crumbled in the face of the American and British `shock-and-awe' campaign..."
"Blair said criticisms of the post-war situation were premature."
Oh, yeah, right, Blair. Nice try. Don't try to change the subject, fella. Why didn't you know you'd win the war so quickly? Why in the hell didn't you know you'd lose so few men? Why didn't you know Iraq's army would just `crumble'? Why did `shock-and-awe' work so swimmingly? Why didn't the war last longer?! Why no Quagmire?!! Why no bloodbath?!!! Why no bloody house-to-house fighting?!!!! Why no Stalingrad struggle over Baghdad?!!!!! These are but a few of the `damaging questions' the embattled Prime Minister must now grapple with. Beating the crap out of Saddam's 24-division-army in days rather than months, with few casualties and little damage to civilian infrastructure -- how could you do such a thing, Blair? Have you no sense of shame, sir? It raises serious questions! `Growing' questions. Major questions. Major questions which raise yet more major questions.
Bottomline? Accountability. Leaders which lead their country to victory need to be held accountable for leading their country to victory. After this smashing battlefield triumph, Heads need to roll! No well-done job should go unpunished. Ever!
|
|
Meanwhile, after almost 22 months without a terrorist event on U.S. soil, serious questions are being raised, some with broad political implications. The lack of escalating al-Qaeda terrorism here at home poses a growing challenge for Democrats hoping to unseat President Bush, whose popularity remains largely undiminished. Why the stability and security here at home? Why no second al-Qaeda wave of violence? Why no murder-suicide bombings at Malls and theaters and sporting events? Why no ambushes by al-Qaeda loyalists? Why no quagmire? Democrats desperately wonder.
Even in areas of the country notorious as Saddam and al-Qaeda holdouts -- Hollywood, Martha's Vineyard, Manhattan's Upper West Side, newsrooms in D.C. and New York -- little evidence of insurrection exists. ;-)
Well, okay, maybe a little. ;-)
Independence Day came and went without a hitch, despite highly publicized warnings of possible terrorism and security concerns at outdoor events marking the nation's 227th birthday.
Electricity and water plants have been free of terrorism. So have the nation's nuclear power plants, oil facilities and ports. No domestic hijacking incident has occurred since 9/11. Trains and subways in New York and elsewhere operate unmolested. America's bridges, highways and tunnels remain undisturbed.
Each new al-Qaeda attack which doesn't happen leads Democrats to worry. Especially presidential contenders. Bush's success in establishing a secure post-9/11 climate here at home has been greatly rewarded politically. Despite a lackluster economy and unrelenting attacks in the media, Bush swept his party to victory last November, re-capturing the Senate while strengthening control of the House. The President remains immensely popular, earning high marks for leadership and vision.
Yet, let there be no doubt as to the purpose behind the spate of recent attacks on our forces in Iraq by roving Sunni bandits and death squads: The bandits hope that in picking off 1 U.S. soldier or more per day, the American public will sour on the mission, demand withdrawal of U.S. forces a la Somalia, paving Saddam's return to power, with Bush's '04 defeat the icing on the cake. A trifecta. Call it the *Roadmap to Resurrection* -- the Ba'ath Party Roadmap (Ba'ath means resurrection in Arabic.).
In this sense, the interests of Iraq Ba'ath remnants and U.S. Democrats dovetail nicely. Both desire to see the President crippled politically. Both yearn to see Democrats back in charge. Both need the mission in Iraq to fail. Both want Bush discredited.
And both fail to grasp one essential element: The enormous shift in public attitude and sentiment post-9/11. Unlike Somalia and Beirut, America today is at war. America knows it's at war, and that it's either the sands of Iraq or the streets of Manhattan. This war was thrust upon us. Of the 3,300-plus U.S. casualties thus far, 90% were American civilians who perished one September morning. Americans are steeled for the long-haul. They harbor no illusions of a cake-walk. They know the road ahead is long and arduous, fraught with inevitable pitfalls and setbacks. Bush has told them so. But they know victory is certain. Bush has promised it.
Even brutality on the scale of Beirut's truck-bombing, which in '83 killed 241 U.S. Marines, will fail to weaken an angry nation's resolve to win. And the Ba'athists haven't produced anything approaching it.
"Our war against terror is a contest of will in which perseverance is power," declared Bush in his State of the Union last January. "In the ruins of two towers, at the western wall of the Pentagon, on a field in Pennsylvania, this nation made a pledge, and we renew that pledge tonight: Whatever the duration of this struggle, and whatever the difficulties, we will not permit the triumph of violence in the affairs of men -- free people will set the course of history."
Nuff said.
Anyway, that's...
My two cents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
