General Petraeus’ Testimony is Not New – Read General Westmorland’s Testimony About Vietnam
September 10, 2007 at 7:09 pm | Posted in American politics, Iraq, Vietnam | 5 CommentsGiven the nature of the enemy, it seems to me that the strategy that we are following at this time is the proper one, and that is producing results. While he is obviously is far from quitting, there are signs that his morale and his military structure are beginning to deteriorate. The rate of decline will be in proportion to the pressure directed against him….
As you know, we are fighting a war with no front lines, since the enemy hides among the people, in the jungles and mountains, and uses covertly border areas of neutral countries. One cannot measure progress by lines on a map. We therefore have to use other means to chart progress. Several indices clearly point to steady and encouraging success. As an example:Two years ago the Republic of Vietnam had fewer than 30 combat-ready battalions. Today it has 154.
Then there were three jet-capable runways in South Vietnam. Today there are 14.
…
As I have said before, in evaluating the enemy strategy it is evident to me that he elieves our Achilles’ heel is our resolve. Your continued strong support is vital to the success of our mission..
Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coastguardsmen are the finest ever fielded by our Nation….Those men understand the conflict and their complex roles as fighters and as builders. They believe in what they are doing. They are determined to provide the shield of security behind which the Republic of Vietnam can develop and prosper for its own sake and for the future and freedom of all Southeast Asia.Backed at home by resolve, confidence, patience, determination, and continued support, we will prevail in Vietnam over the Communist aggressor.
So sad.
5 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Comments
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.
The Good Democrat 
(From Michael J. Totten, cross comment dup):
Thanks to defeatist Dan for at least being polite and adding interest in the thread — to the many deserved ‘Great Job, Michael’ comments.
I’m happy for the “Surge” to get the credit, but let me ask an analogy in teaching youngsters to drive.
In Method A they teach 8 year olds, Method B they teach 12 year olds, Method C they teach 16 year olds.
Would you really argue that Method C is a superior method, rather than that 16 year olds are ready, and younger kids aren’t?
If 1 year is 7 dog years, maybe 1 calendar quarter is a “new nation” development year … and new Iraq is only 17 ‘years’ (quarters since spring 2003) old.
No Method was going to work in Iraq before the Iraq people are ready (although the Kurds went thru their 20 quarters of early development starting in 1992, so are somewhat done).
Maybe any Method would work after they are ‘ready’. And, like teenagers, Iraqis are getting ready now.
While I’m sure the surge has helped speed the Anbar cleansing, the tribes started their anti-Al Qaeda before the surge, and before the rules of engagement changed.
Dan — you ask about Iraq and your site discusses Vietnam. How many civilians must the commies kill/ murder before you think it would have been better for the Dem Party Congress of 1974-76 to fully fund and support South Vietnam (rather than vote in favor of commie victory)? This is the value question the anti-war folk refuse to answer or discuss.
How many must be murdered or die in exile in Darfur before liberation is justified? (knowing many civilians WILL be killed by liberating forces, despite attempts to minimize such deaths.)
Thanks partly to anti-American press, it has taken the Iraqis a long time to really believe the Americans are the GOOD guys — good, but not perfect. Perfectionist critics … are the enemy of the good.
The killing in Iraq today is significantly due to Iranian support for murder. I hope/ won’t be surprised/ that an Iraqi political party starts blaming Iran for the many acts of war the Iranians have been perpetrating.
I fantasize about an anti-Iranian, unified Arab-Kurd-Sunni-Shia Iraq Army, trained, funded, and supplied by America, demanding reparations from Iran for the murders they’ve been supporting.
(I’d suggest 10 mil. USD per death, all to be blamed on the Iranians if not provably attributable to other forces.) But then I fear this is a nightmare, too.
Comment by Tom Grey - Liberty Dad— September 10, 2007 #
Oh, the S. Viet “nation” was only 4 quarters old in 1974 (after Paris in 1973) when the Dems decided that the US couldn’t use any more military to support them, and they were only 8 in 1975 when the Soviet supported N. Viet commies violated their written agreement to only use peaceful methods in re-uniting with the South.
Of course, sad ‘America is worse’ folks like yourself probably didn’t worry about the Killing Fields — the worst genocide in my lifetime, caused by Evil commies, explicitly supported by the Dem Party (that I voted for in 1976, but never since).
Comment by Tom Grey - Liberty Dad— September 10, 2007 #
The Killing Fields? You mean the ones in Cambodia? Huh, I didn’t know it was Democrats who expanded the war into neighboring Cambodia, bombing it back to the stone age, and destabilizing it enough to allow madmen like Pol Pot to run ramshod through that poor country. I was under the impression that was all Nixon’s doing. A Republican. Huh, silly me.
Comment by Daniel— September 10, 2007 #
I’ve long said the hard-core bozos who support the moronic war in Iraq are the same ones who never could admit we were defeated in Vietnam. Thanks for making the point so well Tom Grey – “Liberty so long as you’ll live under an American boot Dad”.
Comment by Anon— September 11, 2007 #
[…] Petraeus vs. Westmoreland Santayana’s ghost sends links: The Horse’s Mouth via The Good Democrat. […]
Pingback by Petraeus vs. Westmoreland « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub— September 22, 2007 #