Which War Is this Again?
Published on June 4, 2006 By Larry Kuperman In Current Events
I am feeling old. As I read about the war, I seem to be asking myself more and more, "Which war is this again? Vietnam or Iraq?"

We are fighting a war against an "Invisible enemy," one who blends into the civilian population that we are trying to protect. This enemy goes to lengths of brutality that seem impossible to combat. Remember the children lining up for candy only to be killed by a car bomb? See the reports of the dead found "executed" inside the nation's capitol? How do you convince people to stand up to such a foe?

The supporters of the war tell us that we could win the war if only the Liberal press would stop reporting only the bad news, weakening our spirit.

A vocal minority opposes the war with demonstrations, which garner much publicity. The opposition draws from the youth of America, particularly from college campuses.

Much of the news seems to resonate for me with events from decades past:

Item 1: US soldiers kill "innocent civilians" after a fellow soldier is killed in an ambush, events are concealed by the US military. How can Haditha NOT evoke memories of My Lai? I don't want to rush to judgment about Haditha, not all the facts are in, but when a war is fought by 19 and 20-year olds, pushed beyond their limits by a surreal atmosphere and seeing their friends killed, when the lines between "friendlies" and insurgents are blurred at best, such incidents are inevitable.

Item 2: New reports came out this week about the death of Pat Tillman, the former football star and US soldier killed by friendly fire. Actually, very little seems new, the press is just rehashing what was already known. Pat Tillman was the shining star of the war on Terror and, details of his death aside, he remains a hero for his willingness to sacrifice his athletic stardom for what he believed. But his death is ironic at best. After a hard-fought battle, he and his fellows were standing up and stretching, when reinforcements arrived. The new soldiers opened fire on Pat Tillman's squad, even though some of those reinforcements recognized that they were fellow Rangers. We now know that he, Pat Tillman, did everything he could to signal his fellow troopers not to shoot, including setting off smoke grenades. While some were yelling to stop, one soldier manning a .50 caliber machine gun continued to fire. Pat Tillman's last words were "Cease fire! Friendlies! I am Pat (expletive) Tillman damn it!" And then the machine gun bullets tore through him.

Item 3: We no longer hear much about the struggle to capture "hearts and minds." We can't point to Afghanistan as a success story, not after the recent riots. There was a car accident, followed by a riot with civilians chanting "Death to America!" US soldiers fired into the crowd. Twenty are dead. The President of Afghanistan condemns the US reaction. Afghanistan wants to bring the soldiers to trial. We refuse. So much for the shining democracy of the Middle East.

I could go on and on, but why belabor the point? When this whole thing started, the President assured us that the "Mission was clear." Is it? Is my eyesight failing, because I don't see it? The Afghanis hate us, but if we stop supporting the current regime, the Taliban will be back. After Haditha and Abu Ghraib, do you think that Iraq will be less of a haven for terrorists when we leave?

I don't know, maybe every generation needs a "Dirty Little War." We certainly seem to have one.

Comments
on Jun 04, 2006
I really hope that I don't offend anyone, particularly with the Pat Tillman part. I dread that someone in his family read this and be offended. I was careful to say "he remains a hero for his willingness to sacrifice his athletic stardom for what he believed" because that is what I feel.

But dear G-d, what an awful way for a hero to die!

When I read about Haditha, I can't help but think of the US soldiers, not much older than my son, who will have to live with the death of a two-year old. Of course their loss is nothing compared to those who lost sons and family, but still. They volunteered to fight for freedom, but how will they be remembered?
on Jun 04, 2006
The Haditha incident involved Marines, not Soldiers.
on Jun 04, 2006
That is the only comment that you care to make????

A "soldier" is usually defined as a person who serves in an armed force.
on Jun 04, 2006
That is the only comment that you care to make????


Yep. Is there something you WANT me to say?

A "soldier" is usually defined as a person who serves in an armed force.


US Army = Soldiers, USMC = Marines. In this case I think it matters because it gives whichever branch a black eye. I'd prefer to not have this pinned on the Army.
on Jun 04, 2006

US soldiers kill "innocent civilians" after a fellow soldier is killed in an ambush, events are concealed by the US military. How can Haditha NOT evoke memories of My Lai?

IN the words of Ronald Reagan "There you go again".

How do you know about My Lai?  How do you know about haditha? let me give you a big clue because I do hold you in a higher regard and think you just mispoke.

THE US MILITARY!

This is the second time in as many days where one has condemned 2.5 million men and women for the sins of a few.  The US MILITARY did not cover it up!  The participants did!  The US MILITARY aired it out!  After discerning the FACTS (actually before, but as they became available).

A richmonder robs a bank.  So by your logic, all Richmonders are bank robbers and we are covering it up since the original person did not cop a plea or blab to the press.

I am getting really sick of this condemnation by association.

on Jun 04, 2006
Huh? For one thing, I wrote a subjective piece, reference paragraph one.

You don't consider "I don't want to rush to judgment about Haditha, not all the facts are in" to be moderate? Where did I condemn the entire US Military?

I said "US soldiers kill "innocent civilians"" and no one is any longer disputing either that the people are dead or that MEMBERS of the US Military pulled the triggers.

I say "any longer" because the US Military did in fact deny that they killed the people at Haditha, until confronted with a video tape of interviews with the survivors. They then changed the story and launched an investigation. These facts are easily corroborated. We do not, as yet, know the circumstances, but everything that I have said is supported.

"This is the second time in as many days where one has condemned 2.5 million men and women for the sins of a few." I fear, sir, that you err in lumping me together with others, as if I were a Richmondeder to use your analogy. I, in fact, posted a disagreement on Bahu's thread. I will not be held responsible for someone else's opinions.

You, Dr. Guy, have read something into my article that simply is not there. If you can quote wording to support your view of what I said, I will be happy to issue an apology.

"How do you know about My Lai?" As for My Lai, William Calley was convicted by a Courts Martial in 1971. Those facts are pretty well proven. Calley was subsequently pardoned by President Nixon, citing circumstances, not disputing what had already been proven in a military court of law.

Texas Wahine, I cited the encyclopedic definition of "soldier." Yes, I understand that the particular branch of service matters more to you than to most, because of your circumstances. But I was seeking a comment more general.
on Jun 04, 2006
Oh, further Dr. Guy, about the US Military airing it out, let me quote: "The details of what happened in Haditha were first disclosed in March by TIME's Tim McGirk and Aparisim Ghosh, and their reporting prompted the military to launch an inquiry into the civilian deaths."

The sequence of events is not as you indicated.
on Jun 05, 2006
The sequence of events is not as you indicated.


He's actually right on this one, Dr. Guy. I heard a talk show host demand John Murtha be tried for treason when Murtha first mentioned it. It did take the press for the USMC to own up to this one.

We'll see how this is dealt with over time. But the USMC did not willingly come forward with the facts on this case until it was demanded of them.
on Jun 05, 2006
If I may leaven this with a bit of humor-

"He's actually right on this one."

Only this one time? To everyone's shock and surprise?

On a more serious note, I wrote about my feelings, not telling you how you should feel. I can understand Dr. Guy's feelings (and Texas Wahine's also, I fear that I may have seemed harsh to her.) I did NOT generalize about the entire military and I have previously written that I relate to the young men serving under such duress.

The thing is that it is impossible to NOT have such incidents when you fight an Invisible Foe. Let me take you back to Vietnam, to the beginning of the Tet Offensive. A young woman, apparently frightened, rushs to the US Embassy seeking succor. It turns out that she has a bomb strapped to her back. How do you react the next time that you see a civilian? Shoot first and ask questions later; that would be the human response.

By the way, I was also right in my reference re My Lai.

Thank you all for posting.
on Jun 06, 2006
By the way, I was also right in my reference re My Lai.


I did not live through the sequence of My Lai; I can only rely on what is written after the fact, so I have to take your word for it. On this incident, though, I watched the events unfold, so I can attest to what you're saying.
on Jun 06, 2006
I wrote in my blog on Kibbutz Metzer that the venom about Haditha is really an unintended compliment. While we often have years and decades between our atrocities, the people of the MIddle East commit them with such frequency that no one even bothers to notice much anymore.

I mean, we're asked to sit down with Hamas and Fatah at the negotiating table, when both organizations have been slaughtering women and children in retaliation for perceived injustice for years. When they go stomping through an Israeli settlement killing children in their mother's arms, where's the outrage then?

I understand where you are coming from, Larry, but the flaw at My Lai and at Haditha frankly isn't on our side. Both wars were being fought for people who, quite frankly, couldn't understand what was going on or even what was in their best interests. We expect people who don't have electricity to be aware enough of world events to see that what we are doing is best for them.

They have no concept of a better world, so when we offer them one they see it as just another Hussein in a different uniform. The people in Vietnam were no different. They had no ability to conceive that one path was better than the other, so they basically just chose sides with how the wind was blowing there, never realizing that there was a lot better places in the world.

So soldiers are sent to nations with ignorant, ungreatful populations that betray them at a moment's notice, and things like this happen. The fact, though, that the world opens its arms to regimes and old-world nations who commit these sorts of atrocities and in the same breath condemns the US when it occurs as an aberation of policy is pretty transparent.

Take a look at what is happening in China right now. Entire communities are being slaughtered for their land. There were tens of thousands of armed conflicts that ended in the deaths of innocent people. We in the West applaud it as progress toward a free market, when in reality it is a thousand times worse than Haditha. There are a lot more delusions at work than just temporal dislocation.