Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

"I'm getting very tired of hearing this trite phrase, as though it's obvious, or indisputable, or useful. Or even true. Of course there is a military solution, or at least, the military is a key component of whatever solution we come up with."

And many of us get tired of hearing that military victory in Iraq is inevitable. Your comment rings true for the general WoT, but hollow when applied to the situation in Iraq. In Iraq, we are facing an insurgency. When was the last time the US waged a successful counterinsurgency? Phillipines, maybe, at the turn of the century?

I agree with the second part of your comment about the military being a key component, but so far we've done a pretty weak job of maximizing the effectiveness of that compenent.

Posted by Andy at April 20, 2007 07:51 AM

"When was the last time the US waged a successful counterinsurgency?"

Viet Nam.

It wasn't the Viet Cong that rolled over South Vietnam. The VC were basically a non-entity by 1970. It was mechanized infantry divisions of the NVA rolling largely unopposed thanks to Teddy Kennedy and his cut n' run gang abandoning our up to that point highly successful Vietnamization policy buy cutting all military funding to the south and prohibiting US air support. The 75 invasion was emminently stoppable. A little air support would have cut it to ribbons.

Posted by Mike Puckett at April 20, 2007 07:58 AM

"When was the last time the US waged a successful counterinsurgency?"

"Viet Nam."

You're kidding, right? You might be the only person on Earth who thinks we won the Vietnam War (after all, a successful counterinsurgency, by definition, requires strategic victory. Winning battles doesn't equate to a "successful counterinsurgency")

Anyone else here actually think we won the Vietnam War?

Posted by Andy at April 20, 2007 08:12 AM

And many of us get tired of hearing that military victory in Iraq is inevitable.

Where have you heard that? Certainly not here. In fact, I'm quite pessimistic about the prospects, given that the Dems have become the party of surrender an defeatism.

Posted by Rand Simberg at April 20, 2007 08:25 AM

Anyone else here actually think we won the Vietnam War?

No, we lost because we quit. But until we did so, the counterinsurgency was in fact successful.

Posted by Rand Simberg at April 20, 2007 08:27 AM

I'm quite pessimistic about the prospects,

The big mystery of this web site is: When did you become such a big fan of the Shiite Islamists who control the Iraqi government? Would you have us fight for Hamas too, just because they can win elections?

Posted by at April 20, 2007 08:47 AM

Vietnam? Yes, we were winning right up until the day we (read "we" as "the democrat party") gave up and quit.

We're also winning in Iraq, slow and agonizing as it may be. And we will win Iraq unless once again the democrats make us quit.

In fact we would be doing much better in Iraq if AQ wasn't constantly being encouraged by idiotic statements by democrats (like Reid just yesterday) and their accomplices in the ultra left wing liberal dominated mainstream media.

Yes I know there are some of you who are tired of hearing that, but the TRUTH is tiresome to those who refuse to accept it.

Posted by Cecil Trotter at April 20, 2007 09:26 AM

"You're kidding, right? You might be the only person on Earth who thinks we won the Vietnam War (after all, a successful counterinsurgency, by definition, requires strategic victory. Winning battles doesn't equate to a "successful counterinsurgency")

Anyone else here actually think we won the Vietnam War?"

I didn't not say we won it, That is a strawman. I said defeat was cheaply, cowardly and lazily snatched from the jaws of victory by the Democratic party.

The NVA won the war with major assistance from the US Democrat party. The VC were virtually non-existant by 1970. These are facts, not opinions.

The Republican party and the US Military won it and the Democratic party then lost it. This is historic fact.

""No, we lost because we quit. But until we did so, the counterinsurgency was in fact successful."

You mean unsuccessful, right Rand?

Actually, I was wrong anyway, I would count El Salvador considering we were much more involved than the general public is aware.

Posted by Mike Puckett at April 20, 2007 09:29 AM

No, the big mystery of this website is why it attracts so many anonymous trolls who erect straw men, and lack reading comprehension.

Posted by Rand Simberg at April 20, 2007 09:45 AM

Maybe conservatives can use that fact. We would have won in the "quagmire" of Vietnam had the Dems not caved to fear and appeasement. We will win in the "quagmire" of Iraq, if the Dems don't cave to fear and appeasement.

Use one of those old "Learn from history or be doomed to repeat it" lines.

Posted by Mac at April 20, 2007 11:11 AM

"I didn't not say we won it, That is a strawman. I said defeat was cheaply, cowardly and lazily snatched from the jaws of victory by the Democratic party."

Here we go with the tired ol' "that's a strawman" argument. Can't you think of another logical fallacy that you'd like to cite, now and then?

A "counterinsurgency" is a multi-faceted effort of which the military is but a component. Even the US military recognizes that. Just because you prevail (or don't fail, typical newspeak by the Right) militarily doesn't mean you've successfully waged a counterinsurgency. We left. We lost. Regardless of who's to blame.

"The Republican party and the US Military won it and the Democratic party then lost it. This is historic fact."

ROFL. The Republican party didn't win jack sh$t. This is why I love this blog; the polemics are mind-boggling (and highly entertaining). They weren't in the majority in Congress during that time, and how many "Republican" sons (and daughters, but mostly sons at the time) do you think were actually trigger pullers? The majority? Ya think? How can you have the audacity to give the Republican Party credit for winning a war we lost?

Mike, you ought to work for the White House, because you are a master spinner.

""No, we lost because we quit. But until we did so, the counterinsurgency was in fact successful."

Mike said: You mean unsuccessful, right Rand?

No, you read it wrong. Rand said "counterinsurgency"

Posted by Andy at April 20, 2007 11:31 AM

Let me present a better timeline, Mike, to help me better understand your argument.

1961-1969:
Democrat President and CinC
Democrat majority in Congress

Meanwhile, in the 'Nam, the successfull counterinsurgency is being waged by a party not even in power. By 1970, the VC are basically a non-entity.

1969-1974:
Republican President and CinC
Democrat majority in Congress

Meanwhile, in the 'Nam, the counterinsurgency has been won by the Republican Party (with some help from the military), but things are going downhill;

1975:

(new) Republican President and CinC
Democrat majority in Congress

Meanwhile, the US, due to that dastardly Democratic Party (who are just as dastardly as when when they watching the minority Republican Party defeat the insurgents back in 63-69), the US admits defeat and sues for "peace with honor."

All hail the Republican Party, who managed to defeat the insurgency and successfully prosecute the war EXCEPT for during that period when they actually had some modicum of power.

Yet, "The Republican party and the US Military won it and the Democratic party then lost it. This is historic fact"

And here I thought Alice in WONDerland was an interesting story.

Posted by Andy at April 20, 2007 12:11 PM

"Here we go with the tired ol' "that's a strawman" argument. Can't you think of another logical fallacy that you'd like to cite, now and then?"

Sure, but yours is clearly a strawman. You seem to use it because you are so proficient at it.

PS, your timeline has more holes in it than a piece of swiss cheese. The North Vietnamese signed the Paris accords in 1973.

The dems controlled the budget and totally tied Fords hands. War Powers Act anyone?

Tell me, How does the "Andy is pulling made-up crap out of his ass." fallacy sound?

Posted by Mike Puckett at April 20, 2007 07:01 PM

Anyone else here actually think we won the Vietnam War?

Yeah, I do. I think Rand and Mike Puckett are dead on, and you're full of shit, Andy. Stale old recycled shit at that.

Furthermore, you might ask yourself whether Vietnam still considers Soviet-style communism as its destiny, or whether they're moving towards the US model as fast as they can without Ho in his grave spinning fast enough to catch fire.

Which means we won the long war, too, even without a military victory in 1975. The difference between the Vietnam government now, whose big concern is how to sell more shrimp to the US, and what the Saigon government would have been like, strike me as not worth much. You sure don't hear much out of Hanoi about the capitalist running dogs and exporting the Revolution, do you? Pretty mum about that, aren't they? Take a look here at what they are up to, though. I see a whole lot of frank capitalist hustling.

Yeah, I'd say we won. Or at least, it's not in the least what Stalin would consider a victory for his side.

Posted by Carl Pham at April 20, 2007 07:31 PM

vietnam was a strategic blunder and ultimately stupid.

Vietnam became a communist power between 1975 through
2007.

Big Deal.

Meanwhile NATO kept the russians out of Europe, and
by 1990, the russians had collapsed.

Dick Cheney was smart enough to know Vietnam was a sideshow, so he dodged the draft.

Posted by anonymous at April 22, 2007 03:52 PM

"Yeah, I do. I think Rand and Mike Puckett are dead on, and you're full of shit, Andy. Stale old recycled shit at that."

Lay off the crack pipe, Carl; your students will be better educated without your steady diet of historical revisionism.

"Furthermore, you might ask yourself whether Vietnam still considers Soviet-style communism as its destiny, or whether they're moving towards the US model as fast as they can without Ho in his grave spinning fast enough to catch fire."

The US model? Are you still living in a bipolar world?

"Which means we won the long war, too, even without a military victory in 1975."

No, an "idea" won the long war. The idea that a market economy is more efficient and desirable than a command economy. Thank you for stating, plainly, what I wrote up front: we lost the war.

Posted by Andy at April 23, 2007 08:09 AM

Did David Hackworth think Vietnam was won in 1970?

Posted by anonymous at April 23, 2007 04:53 PM

Post a comment