I heard something the other day that has evolved my point of view on what I read, watch and to whom I listen for advice. The advice was to read, listen and seek out those opinions with which one does not agree. That is, if we all read authors that share our opinion, we’ll never grow to understand others or the points they are trying to make. We won’t understand the strengths of their arguments or their weaknesses. The problem is that George Bush (43) has surrounded himself with people who have a similar agenda (or an agenda of their own) and simply does not understand the point of view many of (a growing many) of us share.
I heard from another Veteran that feels that if we had committed more troops to Vietnam we could have “prevailed”. Having lived in Thailand and Vietnam for over six years, having seen the political climate there, having heard first-hand from the French who tried and failed and having studied the political and economic climate in Southeast Asia I doubt very seriously if any foreign power could cleanse South Vietnam from those that would have us leave. We would have had to invade North Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos which would have (undoubtedly) bring in the Chinese, North Korean and their Russian allies. Like Iraq, propping up a government that can’t protect itself can only go so far if the people they “govern” don’t want them in power. In Thailand (where conditions were and are very different), it was often the people, not the Thai (or American) army that made sure foreign insurgents were arrested and dealt with. When the “Thai-cong” came into villages in the north and began to spread their lies, it was the village people that sent their heads back to Bangkok. Every village from north to south has a revered picture of the King and Queen. No such loyalty to the government existed in Vietnam. No such loyalty to the government (past or present) exists in Iraq.
If George Bush had read (and understood) a bit more history before swaggering into Iraq looking for cheap oil, he would have realized the French were right. The country is barely governable. Ever since it was partitioned after World War I, the Iraqis, Turks and Iranians (and their neighbors) have had a tough time living together. I think that sometimes it’s best if the west just leaves these places alone to settle their own differences.
Where we might have done some good would have been in Sudan. But that’s another story. Perhaps the Republicans will take the military there after they’re done with Iraq and Iran, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan—spreading Christianity and their twisted concept of Freedom that include spying on their own citizens without a court order, secret foreign (and domestic) prisons, no habeas corpus protection and clandestine operations within our own borders.
I applaud the Senate for standing up for our rights. It’s about time they got some backbone.
I heard from another Veteran that feels that if we had committed more troops to Vietnam we could have “prevailed”. Having lived in Thailand and Vietnam for over six years, having seen the political climate there, having heard first-hand from the French who tried and failed and having studied the political and economic climate in Southeast Asia I doubt very seriously if any foreign power could cleanse South Vietnam from those that would have us leave. We would have had to invade North Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos which would have (undoubtedly) bring in the Chinese, North Korean and their Russian allies. Like Iraq, propping up a government that can’t protect itself can only go so far if the people they “govern” don’t want them in power. In Thailand (where conditions were and are very different), it was often the people, not the Thai (or American) army that made sure foreign insurgents were arrested and dealt with. When the “Thai-cong” came into villages in the north and began to spread their lies, it was the village people that sent their heads back to Bangkok. Every village from north to south has a revered picture of the King and Queen. No such loyalty to the government existed in Vietnam. No such loyalty to the government (past or present) exists in Iraq.
If George Bush had read (and understood) a bit more history before swaggering into Iraq looking for cheap oil, he would have realized the French were right. The country is barely governable. Ever since it was partitioned after World War I, the Iraqis, Turks and Iranians (and their neighbors) have had a tough time living together. I think that sometimes it’s best if the west just leaves these places alone to settle their own differences.
Where we might have done some good would have been in Sudan. But that’s another story. Perhaps the Republicans will take the military there after they’re done with Iraq and Iran, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan—spreading Christianity and their twisted concept of Freedom that include spying on their own citizens without a court order, secret foreign (and domestic) prisons, no habeas corpus protection and clandestine operations within our own borders.
I applaud the Senate for standing up for our rights. It’s about time they got some backbone.
Leave a comment