home

Iraq: Vietnam on Speed

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 10:15:08 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Frank Rich says Iraq is Vietnam on speed.

Iraq is Vietnam on speed - the false endings of that tragic decade re-enacted and compressed in jump cuts, a quagmire retooled for the MTV attention span. But in at least one way America is not back in Vietnam. Iraq hawks, like Vietnam hawks before them, often take the line that to criticize America's mission in Iraq is to attack the troops. That paradigm just doesn't hold.

Rich also gives an excellent review of the film Gunner Palace. Background here and here.

< Ross Execution Postponed Until Monday; Judge Threatens Lawyer | Decriminalizing Breasts >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Iraq: Vietnam on Speed | 21 comments (21 topical)
    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 03:10:46 PM EST
    From the post - "....often take the line that to criticize America's mission in Iraq is to attack the troops. That paradigm just doesn't hold." Can anyone tell me why that is true? I mean saying it doesn't hold proves nothing. Can anyone explain why civilian morale and support for a war and the troops, which has been considered important for thousands of years, is now not important?

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#2)
    by glanton on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 03:27:02 PM EST
    Jim, The answer to your question inheres in something quite simple. The soldiers do not by any means set policy: they enforce it. Those of us who abhor the laws against marijuana are not thereby constrained to feel the same way about the police officers who make marijuana-related arrests. Of course, a policeman may quit his or her job at leisure, at the appearance of laws that they simply cannot in good conscience enforce. This is where the analogy breaks down. Soldiers sign up to defend their nation, and we value and admire them immeasurably because of it. At the same time, we take it for granted (ostensibly) that their lives will only be risked, as it were, when necessity demands it. Soldiers cannot bow out of 'wars of choice' with the ease of police officers, obviously. But we can sure as hell protest such wars without betraying those who enforce it. The soldiers, I would imagine, whether they are for this particular action or not, understand how our republic works as well as anyone, and that we are simply exercising our constitutional duty to speak out against a government we feel has overreached.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 03:46:49 PM EST
    glanton - The war they fight, and the battles they are in, are directly effected by home from morale and comments, as perceived by the enemy. If the enemy sees a country filled with protests and criticisms they are much more likely to be encouraged than if they see a country that is united and dedicated to the task at hand. An encouraged enemy is a more effective fighter. His morale is higher, his attitude is better. He is an all around better fighter. This translates into dead US military. I don't think any rational person can deny the above.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#4)
    by glanton on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 04:14:50 PM EST
    Okay Jim, I understand your point, and whether you believe me or not, I respect it. People dear to me are in harm's way right now. So riddle me this: If we put your call to hegenomous loyalty into practice, then what if anything would ever be there to stop a government from taking us into any war, however whimsical? Surely you understand that your dictum, when applied, would effectively rob American citizens of the only means they have to participate in the life-and-death realities of governance. Really, shall we shut up and support our government's policies, regardless of what those policies are? Have we no recourse, then, but to dwell between you branding us as 'traitors' on the one hand, or quitely standing by in the face of what we consider to be horrific wastes of human life on the other?

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 04:42:47 PM EST
    Glanton - Citizens can vote. And the candidates can frame the issue. But, after the vote is taken, shut the hell up until the next election. And we are speaking only of situations when when we are at war, and have troops involved. And I haven't called you a traitor. I have just pointed out what is a fact during war. Tell me this. If home front support and morale is not important, why do all warring nations practice propaganda? We seem to forget that what we have here is a constitutional replublic, not a democracy. Your approval of every action the government takes is not required.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#6)
    by soccerdad on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 04:49:17 PM EST
    But, after the vote is taken, shut the hell up until the next election.
    Hell, no. As far as I know the first amendment has not been suspended, at least not yet. This is a ploy simply to try and do away with opposition and they are playing on people's emotions.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#8)
    by glanton on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 05:07:54 PM EST
    You speak true of the propaganda. Of course, we have been flooded with plenty of propaganda ourselves. Just because you're inundated with it don't mean you gotta believe it. Of course our republic does not necessitate that I agree with what the government does. But neither does it necessitate that we take it lying down, either. *****Again, my central fear is something you have yet to address: according to your dictum of 'everybody shutting up when there's a war on,' warfare would be the single most effective way for a government to dramatically increase its dominion over the populace, yes? Do you not see that this has already happened in large part, that this phenomenon has facilitated the rollback of civil liberties in this nation and will continue to do so? As Wes Clark has rightly pointed out, Dubya invokes his Commander-In-Chief status in all kinds of scenarios that have nothing to do with foreign policy, and the pundits are even worse. No. We owe it to our nation and to ourselves to stand up and protest when injustices are being committed. Period.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 05:25:43 PM EST
    glanton - You keep ignoring my comment about candidates framing the issues and people voting. Could you be specific about loss of civil liberties? BTW - Note how your comments keep on coming back to "you." Your rights. Your loss.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 05:27:21 PM EST
    Basharov - See my comments to glanton. BTW - No one said you could say anything you want. I'm just noting the results.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 05:28:37 PM EST
    Groan.... That is "No said you could not say anything you want..."

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 05:38:02 PM EST
    No, nobody said that, you just said: shut the hell up until the next election. We misunderstood.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 05:40:47 PM EST
    back to the topic - This war is going about as well as I expected which is to say, not very well. But major combat ended many months ago as I recall when Dubya declared the mission accomplished. Well, mission accomplished. We need to declare victory and withdraw now.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 06:10:10 PM EST
    Can anyone explain why civilian morale and support for a war and the troops, which has been considered important for thousands of years, is now not important? How about letting people think for themselves for a change? You seem to be doing just fine.. On second thought, better not, some people might actually start to think they´ve been deceived. That´d be really bad for morale. Want to really boost troop morale? How about giving ´em better armour instead of telling them things such as; h*ll, if they blast you, you´ll probably die anyway. a country filled with protests and criticisms.. Then it´s probably time to adjust the policy. An encouraged enemy is a more effective fighter. His morale is higher, his attitude is better. He is an all around better fighter. This translates into dead US military. PPJ changes the subject to...enemy morale Supposed the enemy gets cornered; he might become more resolved or panic...Bottom line: You don´t know, so don´t count on it.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 06:13:21 PM EST
    CA - "mission accomplished" is a singular term. My mission of getting a hair cut today was accomplished shortly after my mission of going to the bank was accomplishd.... And sorry if I confused you with a suggestion. I never knew my commands carried such force.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 06:48:48 PM EST
    Rumsfeld and American Morale My mission of getting a hair cut today was accomplished Jim, that´s quite a feat, speaking of finished haircuts...I hope the barber didn´t forget to put up the "Mission Accomplished" banner above the mirror.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 08:34:05 PM EST
    IM - No, the enemy morale is what I see as the result. Surely you do not think that protests against the war is not noticed by the enemy, as well as our troops? Do you really live in such a vacuum?

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 09:54:49 PM EST
    Jim, please get yourself, your new haircut, and all the family members you can muster and get right over to Bagdad. They need your wisdom and certainty so badly over there. You believe in this matter, your optimism and certainty will make it happen.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 10:09:52 PM EST
    No Jim, I live and breathe, occasionally inhaling carbon dioxide from all the clean air in the city, every now and then... Surely you do not think that protests against the war is not noticed by the enemy, as well as our troops? No, not really. I think the morale factor is overestimated by you in this case. With your presumption...it seems, enemy morale should be at all time low because there are so few protests back in America. It just doesn´t add up, you´re pulling strawmen. As for the troops...they´ve got more important things to worry about. i.e. staying alive while being assigned for police duty in Iraq, after mission has been accomplished.

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 05:34:24 AM EST
    CA - No, as I have noted before, it is your turn to defend the country. Hope you do as well as past generations have done. IM - Uh, did you miss Kennedy just say bring the troops home? Wasn't it Kerry who said, "Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time?" Didn't Dean spend months and months ranting about the war? What did he say when the Saddam brothers were killed? When Saddam was captured? Do you think they have the Internet, and do you think they can surf it?

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 09:32:28 AM EST
    Since you worry so much about the war critics, your morale should be really low. Be careful, it could affect your judgement

    Re: Iraq: Vietnam on Speed (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 12:03:13 PM EST
    Jim, I think I am roughly the same age as you. We have probably both done our best to defend the country in our own ways. You and yours should continue to take your commitment to military action right to Bagdad. Me and mine will continue to take our commitment to peace any where the Spirit directs. Where did you serve, Jim? Have you ever seen ground combat or just an armchair warrior?

    Iraq: Vietnam on Speed | 21 comments (21 topical)