George and Richard
by
Charley
Reese
by Charley Reese
DIGG THIS
President
George Bush's claims about what will happen if we pull out of Iraq
is almost word-for-word identical to Richard Nixon's speech explaining
why we must not pull out of Vietnam.
A "precipitate
withdrawal" would result in a bloodbath, destabilization of
Southeast Asia, would embolden our enemies and result in more war
not less, Nixon said. And that is what Bush is saying, if you substitute
"Middle East" for "Southeast Asia."
Nixon succeeded
not in winning the war in Vietnam, but in prolonging it until 21,000
more young Americans died in the jungles and rice paddies. Then
we withdrew, and none of Nixon's predictions came true.
To draw a
further parallel, we got into the Vietnam War because the people
who put us there: (1) didn't know the history; (2) didn't speak
the language; (3) didn't understand the culture; and (4) arrogantly
assumed that American firepower and technology could overcome any
and all obstacles.
The Vietnamese
were able to defeat us, despite our superiority in firepower and
technology, because it was their country and we were foreign invaders.
The people were on their side, not ours. They knew they could wear
us down. They were willing to lose millions of people, and we weren't.
The current
president, who really does seem to occupy a state of denial, has
always refused to accept the fact that most of the opposition to
our occupation of Iraq is simply Iraqis who don't want foreigners
occupying their country. He has always tried to blame the resistance
on outsiders al-Qaeda or Iran or Syria. There are some outsiders
in Iraq, but they wouldn't survive two days if it were not for the
American occupation.
The question
Congress hasn't asked about the president's so-called new strategy
of spreading American troops all around Baghdad is, What's going
to happen when they leave, as they inevitably will? The president's
strategy is based on the assumption that if we can dampen the violence,
Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds will embrace and form one united, secular
government.
That is a
foolish assumption. Shi'ites were dumped on every day of every year
since British and French politicians created Iraq out of the wreckage
of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I. This is the first
time ever they have held the reins of power. They are not going
to give them up or even really share them with the Sunnis. The Kurds
are interested in an independent Kurdistan and don't particularly
like Arabs anyway. Iran will help the Shi'ites, and the Saudis will
send money to the Sunnis.
Whether we
leave or stay, the fighting will go on until one faction or another
attains dominance. That means there will be no democracy in Iraq.
And President Bush is wrong when he claims that all people desire
freedom. They first desire survival and security.
So President
Bush will accomplish the same thing Richard Nixon accomplished.
He will get more Americans killed, and eventually we will pull out
of Iraq. It's not just the casualties that will drive us out; it
is the enormous expense, the wear and tear on the Army, the necessary
neglect of important domestic problems, and the political divisions
at home, which will only grow more exacerbated.
Our
present emperor has no clothes. If the American people want to survive
with some prosperity and sense of security, they'd better find a
new emperor who at least has the brains and intellectual curiosity
to play the Great Game on the international chessboard. So far,
the wannabe emperors don't show much promise.
April
28, 2007
Charley
Reese [send
him mail] has been a journalist for 49 years.
©
2007 by King Features Syndicate, Inc.
Charley
Reese Archives
|