On Iraq, Viet Nam and Fighting Terrorists

In an August 22 speech, the Historian-in-Chief claimed, among other things, that America’s enemies view American withdrawal at the end of the Viet Nam War as a sign of our inherent weakness. Throw in Beirut or Somalia and Bush is 100% correct. Kudos to his speech writers. Someday a young terrorist may point out to his followers that the US did not have the stamina to complete our mission in Afghanistan before moving on to Iraq.

The conceptual error, or rather the psychological crutch, comes in concluding that Viet Nam was lost because we pulled out. By definition I suppose the war is not lost until you leave the battlefield or are dead. In practice, there comes a moment when one side can no longer achieve victory and the war is, for all intents and purposes, over. This is the point when those living in the Reality-Based community start searching for a way to prevent their retreat from turning into a rout.

The lesson on Viet Nam is that the number of situations in which military might is sufficient is fleetingly small. So Osama Bin Laden thinks that the US is weak because it pulled out of Viet Nam and Mogadishu? Let him! This is a man who believes that he is going to establish a new Caliphate. So let’s allow him the fantasy that America is a pushover. We may be naïve and anti-intellectual but we are also basically resilient and just plain big. Now is the time to prove we are not stupid.

While Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri sit in godforsaken Waziristan, boasting about how they have tricked the West into doing their bidding, we should come to our senses and treat these thugs in a quiet and deliberate way. No B52s. No bounties. There may still be a role for “special” units but the thrust will be - *gasp* - diplomatic and judicial. We have dealt with spies, internal terrorists and organized crime in the past. Many were brought to justice. It’s not sexy and it would be hard work but it can be done (as if fighting a land war in central Asia is a cake walk.) America has never been especially good at human intelligence and we will have a lot to learn. In the end, however, while Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri dream their dreams of the overthrow of apostate Egypt and Saudi Arabia, we will be steadily tightening the noose and dragging them, finally, disgraced and robbed of their mystique, to be judged before the world.

Update 24-Aug-2007: Punched up the ending

The Pakistan Americans Don't Know

Sitting in our living rooms watching Fox News, we Americans assume that Dick Cheney can fly to Islamabad and demand that President Musharraf to do whatever we need him to do. Kill Osama Bin Laden? Yes, Sir! Disband the Taliban? Will be finished on Thursday!

Well here is a piece in the Asia Times illustrating just how different US and Pakistani interests are. Basically, it claims that Pakistan is setting up a Talibani Mullah to take over Afghanistan and move Kabul's orientation away from India and to Pakistan.

[Update: fixed subject agreement issue]

Afghanistan Redux

Retired Gen. Victor Yermakov who commanded the Soviet Army's efforts around Tora Bora, Afghanistan in the 1980s is quoted in this McClatchy item:

"I was very impressed by the Americans," he said. "Gaining control of Tora Bora is a great accomplishment. I should know. I did it three times."

He shook his head ruefully, then added: "Unfortunately, the second I turned my back on the place, I needed to conquer it again. It is the same now. It will never change."

Still, he said, "every nation believes it is more clever than those who came before."

Nothing to add.

Street Cred

From newly crowned Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates:

"Failure in Iraq at this juncture would be a calamity that would haunt our nation, impair our credibility, and endanger Americans for decades to come"

Impair our credibility? Like 3 1/2 years of ineptitude has not already done that? Is that what it all comes down to, our precious reputation? Forget the Iraqis, because it's all about us, isn't it? Well, guess what? Saving face is a dead end. Strategically, we have lost in Iraq. Every terrorist and insurgent in the world has seen that they can bog down a super power if they are patient.

If strength of will and willingness to apply force were all that was necessary to overcome an insurgency in an alien landscape then Afghanistan would still be a Soviet client state and Chechnya would be the summer playground of the Moscow elite. There are simply some things that are impossible. At some point Wisdom must overcome Machismo.

Let's face it, the person whose reputation is on the line is one George Walker Bush. In January of 2009, our enemies will be forced to reckon with a potentially competent leader of the world's sole super power. Oh sure, there'll be a mess to clean up and America will be less safe than it might otherwise have been but Bush's fiascoes will be relegated to history. The new President will move forward: new alliances will be made and new strategies employed.

What Shrub doesn't understand is that history is not riding on his every decision. There are times and situations where Men of Importance step forward and leave their mark on the world. This is not one of those times and George is not one of those men. The Iraq crisis was created from whole cloth by Bush's cronies, not thrust upon him at a time of urgent necessity. James Buchanan certainly faced a nation in need of a solution but history has largely passed him by. Being President does not automatically make you indispensable. Wanting to be a Transformational President does not make you one.