Not this time: The Lesson of Vietnam

Not This Time

Published 01/27/2007

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of
South Vietnam.

In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked. Now in Iraq,
Petraeus has as good a chance of success, starting with the
pacification of Baghdad, as Abrams had. And the painful lesson of
Vietnam applies in Iraq: Don't give up when victory is at hand.

Those in Congress who advocate retreat in Iraq refuse to acknowledge
this lesson. And they may have their way, whatever Petraeus
accomplishes. With their calls for troop withdrawals and fund cutoffs
and their antiwar resolutions, they have put America on a slippery
slope in Iraq. And we know where it leads: to defeat while victory
remains quite possible. This happened in six descending steps in
Vietnam, and today's coalition in Congress of antiwar Democrats and
vacillating Republicans has started pushing us down that dangerous
slope.

The first step is, when the war goes poorly, public support falls and
politicians dramatically increase their criticism. In Vietnam, this
occurred after the Tet offensive in 1968. In Iraq, it occurred
gradually at first, then rapidly once violence and chaos in Baghdad
flared over the last year.

Step two consists of growing criticism of the foreign government that
America is supporting. In Vietnam, the target was the government of
President Thieu. In Iraq, it's the elected government of Prime
Minister Maliki. Senator Hillary Clinton, for instance, insists Maliki
has failed to seek reconciliation between Shia and Sunnis--that is, a
political solution. "I do not support cutting funding for American
troops, but I do support cutting funding for Iraqi forces if the Iraqi
government does not meet set conditions," she said two weeks ago.

The third step involves resolutions and threats. This week, the Senate
will take up resolutions opposing the addition of 21,500 troops to
Iraq, a buildup Petraeus says is indispensable to his plan to secure
Baghdad. If resolutions fail to force President Bush to begin winding
down the war, Senator Joe Biden promises the Senate will take stronger
measures. In the Vietnam era, congressional critics passed limits on
funding.

The fourth step--the one we're approaching now in Iraq--would put
restrictions on troop deployments. In 1970, the Cooper-Church
amendment sought to bar funding for any American troops in Cambodia, a
sanctuary for invading forces from North Vietnam. Today, Hillary
Clinton would put a cap on the number of American soldiers in Iraq.
Webb, echoing many others in Congress, said withdrawals should begin
"in short order."

Step five is the last resort of war opponents: a fund cutoff over the
protests of the president. In Vietnam, it came in 1974, after American
combat troops had been withdrawn, but with the United States still
supporting and funding the South Vietnamese government. What's
striking is how much the congressional majority then resembles today's
antiwar coalition, mostly Democrats but with more than a handful of
Republicans. True, only a minority in Congress favors a cutoff today,
but that bloc could grow.

Step six: the collapse. In Southeast Asia, it led to the deaths of
more than two million people in Vietnam and Cambodia after the
Communist triumph. The members of Congress whose actions prompted the
collapse expressed no shame or embarrassment for having betrayed
allies. And practically no one held them accountable. Their perfidy
was greeted with silence. "

PJ O'Donovan wrote:
Not This Time

Published 01/27/2007

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of
South Vietnam.

In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked. Now in Iraq,

Of course it did.
Now finish watching your Rambo movies to see how the US *really* won the
war in Vietnam.

--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com

"PJ O'Donovan" wrote in message news:
...
Help
Not This Time

Associated Press
Monday, Jan 15, 2007

BEIJING - A court has ordered a Chinese television production company
to pay damages to a man who received more than 3,000 nuisance messages
after his mobile phone number was used in a police TV drama.

The court said the Runshi Rongguang Film Production Co. should have
made sure the number was not in use before having a villain say it
aloud on-screen, China's official Xinhua News Agency reported.

The company was ordered to pay $256 to the mobile phone customer, Chen
Bing.

Chen, 39, says he started receiving a stream of text messages in July
2004.

Let is be knownst that on 28 Jan 2007 11:19:33 -0800, "PJ O'Donovan"
writted:

Not This Time

Published 01/27/2007

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of
South Vietnam.

When will you realise, PJ, that the war is lost?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Deeply Filled Mortician wrote:

Let is be knownst that on 28 Jan 2007 11:19:33 -0800, "PJ O'Donovan"
writted:


Not This Time

Published 01/27/2007

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of
South Vietnam.


When will you realise, PJ, that the war is lost?

More to the point, when will the moron in our White House
realize it?

On Jan 28, 9:52 pm, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:

When will you realise, PJ, that the war is lost?More to the point, when will the moron in our White House
realize it?-

The present war likely should never have been started (under the
pretext of intelligence which proved false if unintentiionally so) and
the inability of Washington to forecast the current situtation is
unforgivable. But it is not so much that the war is lost as that the
credibility of the United States as an ally was severely damaaged in
VietNam and will be lost absolutely in Iraq if we flee the battleround
now. Friends are helpful; it is not good to have none.

Larry in London but usually in Berkeley (where the VietNam war was
really lost)

PJ O'Donovan wrote:
Not This Time

Published 01/27/2007

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of
South Vietnam.

In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked.

Uh-huh. You could tell that by the way everyone scrambled onto the
helicopters in Saigon

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a
credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets
of
South Vietnam.

In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked.

PeeJay

Uh-huh. You could tell that by the way everyone scrambled onto the
helicopters in Saigon

Joan Aix

Myth: The American military was running for their
lives during the fall of Saigon in April 1975.

The picture of a Huey helicopter billed as military
helicopter
evacuating people from the top of what was billed as
being the U.S.
Embassy in Saigon during the last week of April 1975
during the fall of
Saigon helped to establish this myth.

Fact: This famous picture is the property of
Corbus-Bettman Archives.
It was originally a UPI photograph that was taken by
an Englishman, Mr.
Hugh Van Ess ( or a Dutchman living in England).

Here are some facts to clear up that poor job of
reporting by the news
media.

Facts about the helicopter at the fall of Saigon

It was a "civilian" (Air America) Huey not Army or
Marines.

It was NOT the U.S. Embassy. The building is the
Pittman Apartments.
The U.S. Embassy and its helipad were much larger.

The evacuees were Vietnamese not American military.

The photo was symbolic of revisionism by you left wing useful idiots
of
the time.

"John of Aix" wrote in message
...
PJ O'Donovan wrote:
Not This Time

Published 01/27/2007

"A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible
new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton
Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new
strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of
South Vietnam.

In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked.

Uh-huh. You could tell that by the way everyone scrambled onto the
helicopters in Saigon


I don't think the US had any major force in Vietnam at that point. They were
all withdrawn in 73 under the Paris peace agreement. I believe a division of
Rangers(?) were hurriedly landed from ships to protect escaping US civilian
and diplomatic staff. This included the helicopters seen in the famous
footage. Look very closely and you'll see that the paniced scenes were of
Vietnamese people TRYING desperately to escape - the US kept coming back for
them until it was too late. The staff (other than the marine guards) were
evacuated quite early.

There is a famous quote: The US forces never lost a single major battle in
Vietnam - but lost the war. Now with 30 more years you can add that the
communist state failed anyway. There are probably more US commercial
interests in Vietnam now than during the war. Vietnamese industry is almost
completely dependant on Western commerce. South Vietnamese have reverted to
capitalism faster than their Northern brethren and are now listed as 4 times
richer than the northern "True Believers".

Moral of the story: Just contain the revolution to the core country and wait
patiently for it to self destruct. Pity they didn't take that approach in
Afghanistan/Iraq.

Rj.

"DBDriver" wrote in message
...
(snipped)
Moral of the story: Just contain the revolution to the core country and
wait patiently for it to self destruct. Pity they didn't take that
approach in Afghanistan/Iraq.

Funny you should say that. I immediately thought of Britain going the
same way only in slow motion. Self destructing with Socialism. The country
has almost reached the point of Vietnam in 1975 but with being taken over
by the world's black and nutmeg coloured refuse. Next few months should
see it in free fall. But then what?

Just pray that America doesn't bail them out this time.