| Author |
Message |
    
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15052
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 12:54 am: | 
|
July 10, 2006
Op-Ed Columnist
A Vietnam Lesson, Unlearned
By BOB HERBERT
By 1971, after years of mindless fighting, dying and widespread atrocities in Vietnam, portions of the U.S. military had fallen into a horrendous state of affairs. Morale had plummeted. Drug use was widespread. Soldiers in units that had previously fought bravely and well were threatening mutiny. Officers and N.C.O.'s were targeted for death by frightened and resentful enlisted men. Racial conflicts abounded.
The biggest lesson we failed to learn from Vietnam was how utterly tragic it was to pull the trigger on an unnecessary war. Now once again we are condemned to suffer the consequences, and those consequences are not always self-evident.
For example, the U.S. military — its capabilities and its reputation so painstakingly rebuilt in the decades since Vietnam — is again falling victim to lowered standards, breakdowns in discipline and a series of atrocities that are nothing less than a betrayal of the many honorable men and women in uniform and the country they serve.
The Army has had to lower its standards because most young Americans want no part of George W. Bush's war in Iraq. Recruiters, desperate to meet their quotas, are sifting for warm bodies among those who are less talented, less disciplined and, in some cases, repellent.
John Kifner reported in The Times last week about a study by a watchdog group that showed that recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed "large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists" to infiltrate the military.
The study, by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist groups, was titled "A Few Bad Men." It said that recruiters and base commanders, under intense pressure to fill the thinning ranks, "often look the other way" as militant white supremacists and anti-Semites make their way into the armed forces.
The center quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying: "We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad. That's a problem."
This comes 10 years after a Pentagon crackdown on extremist activity in the armed forces. The crackdown followed the Oklahoma City bombing, which was carried out by Timothy McVeigh, a gulf war veteran, and the murder of a black couple by skinheads in the Army's 82nd Airborne Division.
This is the sort of thing that happens when the military is run by power-hungry amateurs who lack the maturity and the sense of history to temper their arrogance.
It was already known that the Army had become more reluctant to release soldiers who were seriously out of shape, or pregnant, or abusing alcohol or drugs. The pressure to put somebody — anybody — in uniform also led to the lowering of standards for admission to the junior officer ranks. For example, minor criminal offenses that previously would have been prohibitive could suddenly be overlooked.
As the Abu Ghraib scandal unfolded, I wondered how such completely and obviously unfit characters as Charles Graner Jr. and Lynndie England had not previously been weeded out of the military, which had bragged for so long about how high its standards had become.
Now we're faced with the case of American soldiers suspected of raping an Iraqi teenager and murdering her and her family. This is one of at least five cases currently being investigated in which American troops have been accused of killing unarmed civilians. Marines are suspected of slaughtering 24 Iraqis, including women and children, in the western town of Haditha last November — a case that in its horror, if not its scale, recalls the My Lai massacre of Vietnam.
Despite the administration's repeated attempts to put the best face on Mr. Bush's war, the predicament confronting the military is growing more, not less, dire. There are still not nearly enough American troops in Iraq to secure the country. Some troops are on their third or fourth tour of duty in the war zone, which is beyond unfair.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the military will be not be able to maintain its current force levels in Iraq for much longer. It doesn't take much imagination to know what happens when you stretch a rubber band too far.
The proud American military has been badly hurt by the wrecking-ball policies of the Bush administration. It deserved better.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
|
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1021
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 7:06 am: |
|
Tom Reingold-
Bob Herbert's left, and anti-Iraq war political slant is quite well known. It's ok for him to express his opinion, but IMHO he is tarring the U.S. millitary with a broad brush. But anything for politics...
There are a LOT MORE good young men and women in the U.S. millitary than bad, and some would argue that at this moment at time we have the highest morale and quality level of soldiers in the time that there has been a volunteer army.
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15056
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 8:25 am: |
|
His point is that morale is low. Yours is that it's high. You're not there, and neither am I, so what do we know? The army is accepting more people who recently would have been rejected. That's not a trend to be happy about. If you want to disagree with that point, go ahead and give it a shot. I'd be curious to see why you think it's good.
|
sylvester the investor
Citizen
Username: Mummish
Post Number: 143
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 8:52 am: |
|
typical blow-hard ultra-left wing cr#p. Why do you feel the need to post this garbage. You are just wasting server space. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3725
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 9:15 am: |
|
When the right feel ideologically challenged and endangered, they just turn it all into a pissing match. Look out, Tom, the extremist right knows it's wrong, and they'll get nasty. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1294
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 10:01 am: |
|
We aren't challenged. We dominate the political scene in all three branches. I just wish that in one election (maybe this November) you liberals will back up all your verbage with action. It's fun reading, but even Reingold has gotten monotonous. |
Spinal Tap
Citizen
Username: Spinaltap11
Post Number: 63
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 10:08 am: |
|
Drivel. But lest I be accused of not properly responding, I’ll waste a few minutes on some of his points:
Mindless fighting? His opinion. Widespread atrocities? BS. A myth. Here is an old post where I address the atrocity myth while discussing Haditha for which, by the way, no one has yet been charged with anything:
I gave the one isolated example in an earlier post but this is an ongoing and widespread phenomenon. It started during Vietnam with the Winter Soldier Investigation which has been exposed as utter nonsense. For example, one of the star “witnesses” was a clown by the name of Chuck Onan. He told the most grisly stories imaginable about things he did in Vietnam while a member of various elite units. He was later exposed as a total phony who worked as a stock room clerk at a Marine base. (These fools always claim to have been in elite units which is ironic considering that elite units are the most highly trained, disciplined, and professional units in the military. On the rare occasions when atrocities do occur, they are usually perpetuated by crappy units with poorly trained soldiers and lousy leaders). Another “witness” was Michael Schneider who also told horrible stories of atrocities he committed in Vietnam. Again, he never set foot in Vietnam and is currently in a mental institution. However, these guys and many others stated this garbage in front of Congress and the press just lapped it up.
This gave rise to the stereotype of the whacked out Vietnam vet which was fueled by Hollywood drivel like The Deer Hunter, Platoon, and Rambo. But the press didn’t care – they just kept going. They followed up with Dan Rather’s “The Wall Within” on CBS in the 1980’s and Peter Arnett’s “Tailwind” report on CNN in the 90’s. Both depicted American soldiers as murders, drug addicts, rapists, sadists, and psychopaths. Both “documentaries” were shown to be demonstrably false and the stories were easily checkable. One “vet” in “The Wall Within”, Terry Bradley, claimed that he had actually skinned 50 Vietnamese men, woman, and children alive. Dan Rather just sat there, stone faced, and actually believed this idiocy. Bradley turned out to be an ammo handler and spent a year in the stockade for being AWOL. No one was ever able to verify any of his crazy stories. (The number of people running around pretending to be vets or war heroes for various reasons is amazing. There are several organizations dedicated to exposing these frauds.) Fast forward to today and we seem to be going down the same path. I can’t count how many stories I have read or heard about soldiers who are having all sorts of problems. Every time there is a crime committed by a vet, it’s on the news and the war is the reason.
Remember Ilario Pantano? He was the Marine officer charged with the murder of two Iraqi men. Acquitted. Autopsy backed his story up. Remember the Marine who shot the “dead” terrorist in the Mosque? He was never charged. Turns out his unit had been attacked several times by terrorists pretending to be wounded or dead (violation of the Laws of Land Warfare) and the reporter who took the video later admitted that the Corporal’s action, in light of the circumstances, was justified. However, how many stories were produced about those incidents?
Let’s see what else? Racial conflicts? Yes there were racial conflicts. It was the late 60’s and early 70’s. There were racial conflicts in the whole country. Why should the military have been any different? Yes there have been some lowering of standards but that is due more to the army increasing its size by about two divisions. If morale is so low, why is reenlistment through the roof? Why is it highest among units that have seen the most fighting?
Yes there is a problem with extremists trying to get in to get the training. This is nothing new. It has been going on for decades. It is not the result of Iraq. As the author pointed out, in the early 90s there was an incident at Ft. Bragg that resulted in murders. Many people were kicked out. Some rightfully so but many were removed just because they had tattoos of things like Confederate flags. Many people believed that it turned into a witch-hunt and many good soldiers had their careers ruined.
Graner was in the military from 1988-1991 and enlisted again in 2002 before the invasion of Iraq. England enlisted in 2001. So how does Iraq have any bearing on their ability to get into the army? I could go on but you get the picture.
People like Herbert despise the military and consider every military action to Vietnam all over again. I wish they would stop the coy games pretending they care about the military and would just start spitting on soldiers again. That’s what they really feel.
|
Twokitties
Citizen
Username: Twokitties
Post Number: 458
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 10:48 am: |
|
Southerner: You calling somebody else monotonous is the funniest thing I have seen in a long long time. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15061
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 11:50 am: |
|
I'll allow that some stories are overblown if you'll allow that some atrocities occur. I'll also need you to admit that they are deplorable and inexcusable.
I understand that these things happen in war. They are in a strange class of things that are at once expected and unacceptable.
The real shocker is not that they occur during war. It's that this was a war of choice, and we seem to have forgotten about this stuff when going into war. Rumsfeld, after all, did say it would be a cake-walk. These stories, however overblown they are, show that it is not a cake-walk.
How long was the US in WW-II? Four years? This is three years with no end in sight.
The only truth I know for sure is that the truth doesn't come out in war time. That's another reason the light-heartedness with which we started and are conducting the war troubles me.
|
Spinal Tap
Citizen
Username: Spinaltap11
Post Number: 64
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 1:55 pm: |
|
Of course atrocities occur and it is inexcusable and horrible. But no other nation airs out its dirty laundry like we do and punish the perpetrators like we do. But they are the rare exception not the rule. However, when people like Herbert lead pieces talking about “widespread atrocities” in Vietnam which has been shown to be total nonsense, it exposes what a military despising hack he really is. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15068
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 2:00 pm: |
|
I'll grant that we probably air our dirty laundry best, and that's a good thing.
It doesn't matter how widespread atrocities are or were. It's a relative term. Two atrocities per war is widespread to some, and one per day is narrowspread to others.
And even if his piece exposes Herbert as biased, it doesn't mean he doesn't have a point. We went into this war forgetting the sh*t we would create, and it needs to be exposed, so we can hope that we think more carefully before starting the next war.
I used to be proud that the US didn't typically start wars. The Bushes put an end to that very long trend. Of course, some may argue that escalating Korea and Vietnam were equivalent to starting wars, but I think we could have taken at least a little credit for not starting a war directly for a very long time.
|
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1030
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 6:22 pm: |
|
Tom Reingold-
Morale is higher than ever after 9-11. Don't forget Tom a lot of kids previously joined only for educational opportunities and not patriotism. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15078
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 6:25 pm: |
|
How do you measure morale objectively? I might even be happy with an unscientific measurement. Where would you point me?
Education is enough of a reason for me. It's a willingness to pay a price in return for something expected.
Funny you should say "since 9-11." How about since the war began? I'm sure it was high between 9/11 and the beginning of the war.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1299
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 7:23 pm: |
|
Twokitties,
I was thinking the same thing as I was typing! When you're right you can be monotonous. Just ask me! |
llama
Citizen
Username: Llama
Post Number: 801
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 7:47 pm: |
|
The war itself is an atrocity and should never have been started. War is a human failure. Most humans are not able to use intelligence over impulse. That's why so many people smoke, eat junk food, and voted for Bush. I'm proud to be able to stand with those who are able to think differently and not be hung up on election results meaning right or wrong. The track we are on is self destructive. The question is will it be via violence or global warming. Then it will be too late for an election. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 2118
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 16, 2006 - 10:19 pm: |
|
As a former officer in the US Army Infantry (Vietnam) who still keeps in contact with fellow officers who remained in the service and are now one and two star generals, with the occasional full colonel thrown in, I disagree with posters on the board who say that morale in the US military is high.
It may be so for those serving on Navy ships, or for those Air Force personnel at a distance from the battle zones, but for Army and Marine personnel on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, morale is FAR from good.
Don't listen to the three and four stars who now make their careers serving the White House and the Pentagon by making Powerpoint presentations to the press and other media.
Talk to colonels, talk to one and two star generals about the morale of their troops on extended tours, on second and third tours in Iraq. They'll tell you candidly how the troops feel and what the state of morale is. They're right there, on the line with their troops, not cossetted safely at Southern Command HQ, or in Germany, or any other staging area for Iraq combat operations.
Then talk to the majors and captains who are leaving the service in DROVES. They'll tell you about the real morale problems further down the line, among experienced non-coms who cut their teeth on Desert Storm, and who themselves are leaving the service at the first opportunity.
Then take a look at the lowered standards for recruits, in order to make recruiting numbers. And you understand an additional reason why senior and experienced officers and non-coms are pulling out.
None of this has anything to do with atrocities, for I doubt that there have been any atrocities that match the media play-ups.
It's a combination of soldiers being tired of fighting without a plan, and being leery of having to depend on less qualified recruits who will make less qualified soldiers. Not the kind you want next to you in a firefight. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page