[antimedia] antimedia: The truth about Iraq....

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by antimedia:
The truth about Iraq....
http://www.antimedia.us/posts/1165181095.shtml


   ....what we really did know, what decisions were made and by whom,
   what Sadaam's plans were, won't be known for decades. Evidence of that
   comes in the form of a book about Vietnam written by a college
   professor who researched only-recently-available documents from North
   and South Vietnam and China as well as from the US viewpoint. Now
   George Mellinger [1]reviews the book, Triumph Forsaken, and finds that
   it destroys numerous myths about the Vietnam War.

     Though I served in Vietnam in later years, Triumph Forsaken seems
     far more believable than the standard "Anti-Imperialism For
     Dummies" version I have heard for so many years. It demolishes many
     mendacious myths and corrects many errors, some the results of
     subsequent propaganda. but others the result of information
     restricted at the time. Nor will this revision be to the comfort of
     only one political faction. I have had to revise personal opinions
     of some of the American actors.
     The Dr. Moyarâs hero clearly is Ngo Dinh Diem, who led Vietnam
     until his assassination in 1963. Certainly he was no democrat in
     the Western sense, but he had the confidence of the great majority
     of his people, who were accustomed to rule by a strong and wise
     leader. His alleged favoritism toward his family anc close
     associates was not only a cultural tradition, but also a reasonable
     measure in a society riven by factionalism and subversion. It was
     Diem who held the Vietnamese government together, and was gradually
     making it perform, and appeared to be gradually defeating the
     communist insurrection. The chapters dealing with Vietnam after his
     overthrow in November 1963 establish that everything was worse
     after he was gone.
     There are plenty of villains and inept buffoons. The first
     troublemaker was Elbridge Durbrow, the US Ambassador under
     Eisenhower. It was he who began poisoning relations, denouncing
     Diem for his failure to act like an American politician. He seems
     to have been the first of a string of unhelpful State Department
     officials, none of whom ever seem to have had a beneficial
     influence. perhaps the worst was Henry Cabot Lodge. Lodge, what we
     would now call a "liberal Republican" was the presumptive
     Republican challenger to Jack Kennedy in 1964, and Kennedy
     appointed him ambassador to Vietnam in order to preempt Lodge from
     attacking his policies. But once Kennedy found that Lodge was
     creating new problems, and even defying direct instructions, he
     still felt politically unable to dismiss him. And so American
     foreign policy was shaped for domestic political advantage. And it
     was Lodge, not Kennedy who was responsible for the Diem coup, which
     made it impossible to stabilize the situation without introducing
     American troops.

   It's not surprising to see the State Department painted in a bad
   light. The US State Department has been the source of some of the
   greatest embarrassments our country has ever had. All too frequently,
   State works counter to the policy of the seated President, most
   frequently when that President is from the Republican party. State is
   also filled with "realists", that unique group of buffoons that think
   we should be negotiating with Syria and Iran regarding Iraq.
   The follow-on volumes should be quite interesting.

References

   1. http://www.oldwardogs.us/2006/12/understanding_r.html