* * *

“McNamara, as far as I'm aware, faced no serious opposition at the onset of Vietnam.”

Nor as much later as what many might be fooled into believing because of the reporting of the opposition as well as the frequent deliberate “engineering” of it. Accounts from Vietnam routinely express outrage at the worst of this misbehavior (“care packages” from college-campus radicals found in Communist caches in Cambodia as well as Vietnam), and even about the smaller insults: “Don't wear your uniform when back on leave in the States as it might upset anti-war people”).

* * *

“Apparently, Rumsfeld has not (yet) had such moral or intellectual qualms about committing our nation and our troops to war.”

That's something you and the rest of us do not “know,” but what we do know is that Rumsfeld (a civilian) clashed with many in the military and was the preeminent public figure among those righties who (behaving like lefties, but in a realm reserved mainly for righties) believed in and insisted on an easy, cheap, clean, tidy, techno-push-button version of warfare. And even worse than that was the lack of substance about the occupation and the need to secure as well as pacify the liberated Iraq.

We _all_ know what the public's verdict was, which didn't even need liberal media bias to reach it, much less the lunacy of Move On, ANSWER, Code Pink, and other forms of perverse entertainment (which if anything worked against such a verdict among better people).

2006 elections — Thumbs Down on the GOP (not only for Iraq, but to a great deal because of it) and who had to leave, as a result? Rumsfeld.

2008 wasn't just about a lovefest among so many with Obama, but about more Thumbs Down on the GOP.

* * *

“At the beginning of our invasion of Afghanistan, we bombed.”

And we continued to bomb, though we have changed our policy to avoid civilian casualties even more than we avoided them at (and since) the outset. In fact, we may have approached the extremes Israel has (it has actually called locations prior to bombing, to let innocent people escape, and of course it lets the guilty escape, too!). See here:

“The [Taliban], who may owe their lives to the new U.S. commander's emphasis on limiting civilian casualties, were among hundreds of militants who have fled the offensive the Marines launched last week in southern Helmand province.”

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationwor…

I went to Vietnam as an antiwar patriot. Within a week I witnessed the first of three cold blooded massacres. Within a month everything went. Honor, self pride, obedience, fidelity, respect for any authority, any belief that there could be a god who should be “worshipped” after I saw an artillery prep of a village with white phosphorus and then the Navy flyboys with napalm for an hour. We found 1 (One) ancient shotgun with the butt rotted off.

Dresden fire bombing planned by McNamara.
Tokyo and a hundred innocent towns in Japan fire bombed under McNamara planning.
Hiroshima bombed under his personal control.
Nagasaki bombed under his personal control.
Personally chose Westmoreland (more kills means we win even if we wiped out villages of 100 and recovered one broken shotgun) to command in Vietnam.

Die Kissinger, die, the devil needs you to baste McNamara as he toasts in napalm and white phosphorus.

Number 5 war criminal in 20th century for murdering unarmed innocents. Stalin, Hitler, Chiang Kaishek, Mao, McNamara, then Pol Pot. I am sure that he was deeply troubled in his declining years for not being number one. All but Hitler died happily in bed of old age. Human race? Cheney is a choirboy compared to this super evil semihuman thug.

I am ashamed that this thing was even considered human. You don't like it I'll face you off with riot shotguns at ten paces because I just never cared after I went to your filthy fucking war. I cry daily for the poor bastards dying in the middle east for this country led by shit that should be in prison for life.

You are very correct with your assessment of the American spirit and thinking–including McNamara's–at the beginning of the Vietnam War:

“I think it is difficult to fault McNamara for actually believing the conventional wisdom of his day – e.g., Vietnam was crucial in stopping the dominoes, American military might could not be defeated, a more efficient war would lead to victory.” and that “McNamara, as far as I'm aware, faced no serious opposition at the onset of Vietnam.”

As I mentioned, in those days I was a gung-ho war supporter (and a gung-ho Republican), and your comments made me think back of those days, and of one of my very first (guest) posts I wrote for TMV, back in April 2008, describing how and why I “flip-flopped” from a Republican to a Democrat.

If interested, you can still read it at Guest Voice, “I, Too, Am A Flip-Flopper.” But, I warn you it was written by a converted Democrat: http://themoderatevoice.com/19175/guest-voice-i….

Thanks for your comments

I came across a father crying over his four little children laying on a bed that had been killed by our bombs. The sight of these dead little faces revolted me. Their father’s anguish dramatically displayed in his face. I wanted to console that man but I knew that if he could, he would kill me for what we did. Tables turned I would have killed him. No explanation or apology would have made any difference, I would have killed him. My life, would from then on, would have been dedicated to killing him and his kind for their crime and my hurt.

Winning “Hearts and Minds”? Not possible.

Maybe so, but he would have done America a great service by admitting what he knew to be true much earlier. Instead the often painful differences of opinion about that war were allowed to fester for another two decades.

As for Rumsfeld, what can you say about a man who has so much blood on his hands and doesn't seem to mind?

We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries … and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions.

We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience … We totally misjudged the political forces within the country.

We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values.

Our judgments of friend and foe, alike, reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders.

We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces, and doctrine.

We failed, as well, to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture.

We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement … before we initiated the action.

After the action got under way, and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course … we did not fully explain what was happening, and why we were doing what we did.

We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgement of what is in another people's or country's best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.

We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action … should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community.

We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions … At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world.