Bush to Invoke Vietnam in Arguing Against Pullout
CNN reports that US President George W. Bush will – Wednesday in Kansas City, Missouri, in a speech for Veterans of Foreign Wars – remember the American people of what happened in Vietnam when the US withdrew. Bush will argue that the US should not withdraw from Iraq, because what happened in Vietnam will also happen in Iraq: those who supported the US – and those who did not actively support, but did not resist the US either – will be slaughtered.
From the speech:
Three decades later, there is a legitimate debate about how we got into the Vietnam War and how we left, whatever your position in that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens, whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like ‘boat people,’ ‘re-education camps’ and ‘killing fields’.
He will also tell the American people / the members of this organization, that although many Democrats argue that terrorists will not be emboldened by an early withdrawal, the opposite is true – history teaches us:
The president will also make the argument that withdrawing from Vietnam emboldened today’s terrorists by compromising U.S. credibility, citing a quote from al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden that the American people would rise against the Iraq war the same way they rose against the war in Vietnam, according to the excerpts.
“Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price to American credibility, but the terrorists see things differently,” Bush will say.
The New York Times adds that Bush’s speech also contains “the following sharp warning”: “Our troops are seeing this progress on the ground. And as they take the initiative from the enemy, they have a question: Will their elected leaders in Washington pull the rug out from under them just as they are gaining momentum and changing the dynamic on the ground in Iraq?”
In other words, “Bush is hardly ready to throw in the towel on Iraq.”
In the speech, he will not only warn the American people, he will also distance himself from al-Maliki. It seems – more and more – that the strategy will be to blame Maliki for just about everything. Although he certainly shares part of the blame, Bush should not act as if he has nothing to do with it. Maliki is not a strong (read good) leader, but Bush mishandled the aftermath of the war terribly as well. If he would have sent enough troops, if he would have opposed the de-baathification of Iraqi society, the situation in Iraq would be quite different today.
Does Maliki need to go? In my opinion it would be better for Iraq. He is far too weak, or he simply secretly supports the Shia militias – which one is correct I am not sure. However, this decision should not be made by foreign politicians, it should be made by Iraqi politicians and the Iraqi people. Bloggers and normal Americans (yes, I made the distinction purposefully) can say that they believe that Maliki should go, but it is quite another thing for politicians to say the same thing. Bush should threaten Iraq that America’s patience is wearing thin, he should talk to other Iraqi politicians, but he can never – never – call for Maliki’s resignation.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
17 Responses to “Bush to Invoke Vietnam in Arguing Against Pullout”
Ma-leaky should go. Along with Gonzo and Dck- they can have a nice penthouse apartment in Dubai. Sitcom gold.
LOL – First he tells an Egyptian dissident he shares his pain. Now he’s invoking Vietnam, the speech would have been better from Alabama.
Why is it I cringe every time Bush tries to make historical points?
Has he forgotten that the Van Thieu’s regime was wildly unpopular and so corrupt that it was essentially a non-functioning government?
Perhaps he would also remind himself that the killing fields weren’t in Vietnam?
I love it. This coming from a President with absolutely zero credibility outside of his nutcase base. Not only that, but his actions thus far have damaged U.S. credibility abroad so much so that Putin’s Russia is trusted as much, if not more than the United States.
What difference does it make? The Iraqi government is absolutely powerless. The various areas around the country are controlled by the militias. It was a mistake to think we could ever “force” reconcilliation between the parties there. It was always going to be on their terms, not ours.
If he hadn’t started the war, Iraqi society would be better today. Ignore that at your own intellectual peril.
Even if there are minor gains in security (which is far from certain), it still doesn’t change the political situation.
flyerhawk – Maybe Kissinger will explain SE geography and politics to W. I didn’t catch the speech, I wonder how many times he mentioned Iran. They are a world power like the USSR and PRC…
Saw an interview with Marget McMillian on CSPAN about her book – Nixon and Mao – I wonder if W sped read this one while choppin brush?
As several others have already pointed out, this is not an especially good analogy.
For one thing, a number of terrible things were predicted for the US as a result of our withdrawal–falling dominos, loss of prestige. As far as I can tell, none of them happened.
My question is: how many fewer lives (Vietnamese as well as US) would have been lost if we had pulled out of Viet Nam sooner?
Matt Yglesias pointed out that between 1965 and 1973 1.7 million Vietnamese were killed, many of them by US forces.
I guess I’m wondering how much of his concern is about the Bush legacy and not US prestige or Iraqi lives. If he’s sincerely compassionate about their plight, why is it he never mentions the 2 million refugees who now find themselves in desperate straits because they had to flee their own country?
KR – A good point, but his speech was for his base, not general consumption. We hardly hear about the Iraqis refugees in Syria and Jordan, it isn’t a “purty picture”. Much of the Iraqis middle class left the country because of criminal gangs and militias. Most were the old Sunnis ruling class, but not all.
kritter is right.
I sincerely doubt that George W. Bush gives a damn about the Iraqi people. His words don’t match up with his deeds.
The idea that there is peace in Asia now because we killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese and wasted their country is completely illogical, but what would I expect from W, a real history lesson? The real similarity between Iraq and Vietnam? We should have left Vietnam as soon as the national government we were supporting there lost the support of their people. From that point on the struggle there was doomed to fail. Now that the national Iraqi government has managed to do the same thing, its time to go.
I am so sick and tired of the Khmer Rouge as result of Vietnam pullout argument. It is completely backward. Our bombing of Cambodia destablized the eastern region of Cambodia and helped Pol Pot garner support. If we had not done so, it is likely that Pol Pot would never have been able to rally enough support to take over Phnom Penh in 1975. Our presence in Vietnam (other than bombing Cambodia) was immaterial to the pre-Khmer Rouge government (which itself was of dubious loyalty; Prince Sihanouk was not as pro-US as Van Thieu). That Pol Pot took power in April 1975, the same month Saigon fell, is more coincedence than a causal connection to US disengagement from Vietnam.
And let’s remember who ENDED the Khmer Rouge killing fields: the Vietnamese Communists in 1979. If we were still fighting in Vietnam throughout the 1970s nobody would have been able to step in and end the Khmer Rouge terror.
No doubt the Vietnamese people suffered political repression under the Communists, especially the former US allies. But many more died in the war to prevent the Communist takeover than did from the Communist regime itself. Don’t let Bush rewrite history.
Rock on Elrod.
Elrod,
You are assuming that the President could tell the difference between Vietnam and Cambodia.
The US press and history also ignores the proxy war between China and USSR as a results of Vietnam. The myth of the 60′s and 70′s was the Communists as a untied front against the US. China and NVA had a war, guess what, the NVA stood up to their historical enemy and fought to a draw(victory).The North Vietnamese were seasoned fighters, the Chinese were victims of Mao’s Cultural Revolution with a weakened army. The US and China sided wit Pol Pot as a proxy to the USSR Vietnam alliance.
If we pull out of Iraq tomorrow, who knows what could happen. maybe a Syrian and Iranian split similar to China and the USSR/Vietnam.
Wow, what do you say to a man whose reason for staying is your reason for leaving?