It is currently Tue Aug 22, 2017 1:48 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: IRAQ WAR: Does Bush Suffer From Namnesia?
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:22 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
Namnesia: forgetting the lessons of Vietnam.

Vietnambien Syndrome: sleepwalking through war with delusions of inevitable victory reminiscent of Vietnam (also called Vietnambulism, a type of somnambulism peculiar to neo-conservatives).


Image


Image


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:23 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
BEYOND IRAQ II
Step one: Discard the Bush policy


The United States once adhered to principles that were both sound and eminently straightforward. As recently as the 1970s and 1980s, the so-called Vietnam syndrome exercised a restraining influence. Americans saw military power as something to be husbanded. The preference was to use force as a last resort, employed to defend vital interests. Overt aggression qualified as categorically wrong.

After the Cold War, enthusiasm for precision weapons and a brief infatuation with "humanitarian interventionism" eroded those principles. During the 1990s, the use of force, usually on a small scale, became increasingly commonplace. The lessons of Vietnam lost their salience. Then came the 9/11 attacks, which prompted the Bush administration to jettison those lessons in their entirety.

Regardless of the election's outcome, however, it will be incumbent upon the next president to replace the Bush doctrine and its corollary. This will be no easy task. Yet the place to begin is with a candid recognition of just how far Americans have strayed from the path of wisdom and prudence since persuading themselves that the lessons of Vietnam no longer applied.

A first step might be to enshrine a new Iraq syndrome to serve the same purposes today that the Vietnam syndrome did after that failed war, reminding us that power has limits, curbing the reckless impulses of our politicians, warning against those who promise peace while sending young Americans to fight in distant lands.

The Iraq syndrome ought to begin with this dictum: never again. This time we need to mean it.

Andrew J. Bacevich

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/07/opinion/edbacevich.php


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ WAR: Does Bush Suffer From Namnesia?
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:49 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:42 am
Posts: 2046
Location: Surprise, AZ USA
anniefey wrote:
Vietnambien Syndrome: sleepwalking through war with delusions of inevitable victory reminiscent of Vietnam (also called Vietnambulism, a type of somnambulism peculiar to neo-conservatives).


I think I would be forced to add; Main practitioners are chicken hawk COWARDS that avoided service in Vietnam through fraudulent Guard Service (Bush's AWOL time in the Air Guard, where even if he had been there wasn't eligible for a Vietnam tour since he didn't check the box on the volunteer form) or fraudulent Draft Deferments (Cheney continued to receive them even after flunking out of college). These practitioners operate under the delusion that life treats everyone the way they are and were treated, and if it doesn't it's your fault you're poor.

_________________
I'm not a member of any organized party. I'm a Democrat.”-Will Rogers

A Proud Liberal...This Day in History...Namnesia Antidote


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:00 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
GOP Senator Slams Bush War 'Arrogance'
Hagel Says White House 'Cherry-Picked Intelligence'

Hagel, who's been a harsh critic of the war since 2003, writes that the invasion of Iraq was "the triumph of the so-called neoconservative ideology, as well as Bush administration arrogance and incompetence."

The Vietnam veteran said he had hoped the lessons from that war would give the nation's leaders perspective before troops were sent to Iraq.

"To the astonishment of those of us who lived through the agony of Vietnam, these lessons were ignored in the run-up to the Iraq War," he writes.

Hagel said Vice President Dick Cheney and others "cherry-picked intelligence" and used fear to intensify "war sloganeering."

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/iraq-war/156 ... etail.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:11 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:43 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
Forty Years After Vietnam, a Reckoning
by James Carroll

In a televised address, President Lyndon B. Johnson surprised the world by announcing a major de-escalation of American hostilities, a cessation of almost all bombing of North Vietnam, coupled with a plea to Hanoi for negotiations aimed at a political settlement. Johnson effectively renounced the goal of military victory.Indeed, his speech marked the end of an escalation that, inside the Pentagon, included proposals for the use of nuclear weapons. What gave this startling announcement its gravity, however, was what followed.

“There is divisiveness among us all tonight. And holding the trust that is mine, as president of all the people, I cannot disregard the peril to the progress of the American people and the hope and the prospect of peace for all peoples . . .

“With our hopes and the world’s hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes . . . Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept the nomination of my party for another term as your president.”

In leaving the presidency, Johnson was accepting the ethical consequences of the mistake he had made. At last, it was possible to believe that the president of the United States had been paying attention to the loss of life, erosion of community, skepticism of the young, disappointment of the old, despair of the poor - all that had followed on his foundational choices.

But today, when the attitude of America’s leadership toward the foundational tragedy it has caused is summed up with Dick Cheney’s “So?”, it is important to remember, by contrast, another president’s act of authentic moral reckoning. What a difference! And why shouldn’t this nation’s soul be sorrowful?

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/31/7988/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 10:42 am 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
General Westmoreland Comes To Washington Today, Will Report We Are Winning In Vietnam

07Apr08
Filed by Michael Carmichael

From 1964 until 1968, General William Westmoreland presented a constant stream of shining, buoyant and uplifting assessments of American potential for victory in Vietnam. When Westmoreland became Commander of US forces in Vietnam, there were a mere 15,000 troops with boots on the ground. After four years of Westmoreland’s misguided optimism, 535,000 troops had their boots ankle deep in the quagmire of the Vietnamese jungles. In an age long before the internet, Westmoreland’s positive messaging for increasing America’s commitment to military intervention in Vietnam received massive media attention and bolstered public support for what would become an abysmally depressing war.

Tomorrow, General David Petraeus will borrow a page from the playbook of Westmoreland. In his testimony to Congress, Petraeus will present his case that the surge has worked, is working and will continue to work long into what the General will portray as a blissful future. Predictably, the General will demonize the nation and government of Iran as inimical to American policy in Iraq. Citing reports of Iranian battlefield commanders fighting alongside Shia insurgents in Basra, Petraeus’ testimony is being designed to create public demand in the United States for expanding the war in order to resuscitate the presidential prospects of Senator John McCain, the neocons’ best hope for realizing their vision of the future – another century of American imperialism, economic decline and cultural disintegration.

When Petraeus walks into the Congressional hearings, he will face questioning from all three remaining presidential hopefuls. McCain will present no problem for the general. They are reading from the same script. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will be on the global stage and under the heat of the spotlight. Their public support is predicated on their opposition to US policy in Iraq and the region.

The scene is set. Petraeus will lay out the pretext for war with Iran. McCain will parrot his agreement. Then the spotlight will shine on Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama. Most international pundits believe that both Democrats will acquiesce to Petraeus’ demands for the expansion of the war. The world will be watching, and so will the American electorate.

If either of the Democrats swallow Petraeus’ bait, it will be the end of their personal aspirations to the presidency. If both do, it will mark the beginning of the end of the Democratic Party as we have known it.

http://www.planetarymovement.org/2008/0 ... -politics/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:50 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
Did we learn anything from the Vietnam War?

April 4, 1967 at Riverside Church in New York City, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr gave a speech that is less well known than "I Have a Dream" -- but is much more powerful. The entire speech is below:



I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join you in this meeting because I am in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization which has brought us together: Clergy and Laymen Concerned about Vietnam. The recent statements of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart, and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: "A time comes when silence is betrayal." And that time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam, many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns this query has often loomed large and loud: "Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King?" "Why are you joining the voices of dissent?"


complete text:

http://www.thoughts.com/Passion09/blog/ ... ed--84553/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:10 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
President's remarks on Iraq

April 10, 2008

If we fail there, al-Qaida would claim a propaganda victory of colossal proportions and they could gain safe havens in Iraq from which to attack the United States, our friends and our allies.

Iran would work to fill the vacuum in Iraq. And our failure would embolden its radical leaders and fuel their ambitions to dominate the region.

The Taliban in Afghanistan and al-Qaida in Pakistan would grow in confidence and boldness. And violent extremists around the world would draw the same dangerous lesson they did from our retreats in Somalia and Vietnam.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq ... text_N.htm

Is he for real?

:x


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:53 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:42 am
Posts: 2046
Location: Surprise, AZ USA
anniefey wrote:
President's remarks on Iraq

The Taliban in Afghanistan and al-Qaida in Pakistan would grow in confidence and boldness. And violent extremists around the world would draw the same dangerous lesson they did from our retreats in Somalia and Vietnam.

Is he for real?


We must remember the War Chimp has another war criminal whispering in his ear, Henry Kissinger. Kissinger thought of his negotiations with North Vietnam as a ploy to win more battlefield time to win the war not a vehicle to peace. Though neither will ever say so publically, the only thing they would consider victory in Iraq/Iran is when both become territories of the U.S.

I notice they never bring up Reagan's retreat from Lebanon. I guess it would be bad form to disparage saint Ronnie.

_________________
I'm not a member of any organized party. I'm a Democrat.”-Will Rogers

A Proud Liberal...This Day in History...Namnesia Antidote


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:37 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
Iraq and Vietnam - Twin Wars?

By Luc Rouffaud

Apr 14, 2008

The 1960's had an influential aura that affected people, countries and politics. It was the beginning of the Vietnam War, a time where United States politics were at an all time low. Could it be possible that the same strategy is being used presently in Iraq? Iraq is America's new battlefront and has often been dubbed "George Bush's Vietnam". The similarities are shocking and an explanation is crucial. The war in Iraq has a revealing correspondence to Vietnam in three distinct ways; reasons for entry, the fighting conditions, and the long term affects on veterans that both wars share. With a good understanding of each war, several similarities may show more clearly.

The reasons for the United States entering these wars are somewhat similar. Vietnam was part of a plan to stop the "Domino Effect" and halt the spread of communism in the East before it eventually spread elsewhere. The Golf of Tonkin incident was an "acceptable" reason for the Green Berets of the U.S. to enter North Vietnam. An American battleship was supposedly "attacked" by ground forces, but later on, was found out that this claim, brought by the United States Army, was false. The situation in Iraq began with American intelligence allegedly discovering weapons of mass destruction. This could easily be connected with the incident at the Golf of Tonkin, because it was used as a valid reason for military action in the region. As it turns out, there weren't nuclear arms in Iraq which is also like the claim that the attack on a U.S. battleship was a fake. Referring back to the prevention of communism, the United States also entered Iraq to diffuse terroristic activities. The connection between the two conflicts is along the lines of interfering with an undesired government that would jeopardize the security of the Allied countries. These two wars both have dramatic beginnings in order to incite a military reaction.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... _wars.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: A Proud Liberal has New Blog
PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:19 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:42 am
Posts: 2046
Location: Surprise, AZ USA
What is Namnesia Antidote?

1. Namnesia: forgetting the lessons of Vietnam.
2. Vietnambien Syndrome: sleepwalking through war with delusions of inevitable victory reminiscent of Vietnam (also called Vietnambulism, a type of somnambulism peculiar to neo-conservatives).
Namnesia Antidote is an attempt by A Proud Liberal to reverse these dangerous syndromes.

When a fellow poster, anniefey, made a post at the TV News Lies Board about these two syndromes I was struck by the pervasiveness of this type of thinking when it comes to the occupation of Iraq. The warmongers in the administration and Congress not only suffer from <b>Namnesia</b> but have gone out of their way to spread the infection. When George "War Criminal" Bush talks about not repeating the mistakes of Vietnam, he is stating our error was withdrawing prematurely and leaving <b>only</b> 58,168 known dead Americans. He is determined to "stay the course" indefinitely in Iraq, no matter the cost in human lives and resources. When anniefey made her post it was with two unhappy coincidences; the five-year anniversary of the Iraq invasion and the occasion of the 4,000th American causality. We had once again failed to learn from history and were doomed to repeating the same errors.

Posts on this blog begin on March 23rd. In 2008, this was both Easter and the date of the aforementioned 4,000th causality. The names posted on this blog are from the Vietnam War Memorial Wall as extracted from the No Quarter organization website. Any errors in the extraction are mine and I apologize in advance for them. While a laudable goal would be to have a posting for everyone whose name appears on The Wall, it is just not feasible for a one-man operation. What I will attempt here is to have posted for each day of the year two lists of these names; the first commemorating the date of death and the second celebrating the birth of those who gave their lives. I encourage anyone to post comments on these individuals, when such a comment is posted, I will attempt to create an individual post with more detailed information for that person. This will give family, friends and supporters the chance to collectively honor and remember these fallen service men. I will post these individual posts by birthdates.

The information on this blog will also appear in my This Day in History blog daily posts. I hope this double posting will give some additional exposure to these men and women while aiding in combating <b>Namnesia</b>.



Permanent Backlink to Blog

_________________
I'm not a member of any organized party. I'm a Democrat.”-Will Rogers

A Proud Liberal...This Day in History...Namnesia Antidote


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 02, 2008 11:26 am 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
First came Vietnam, then Iraq, now Iran lies directly in the crosshairs
By Michael Payne
Online Journal Contributing Writer

Apr 30, 2008

History has a way of repeating itself but does anyone really pay any attention? First there was the horror of the Vietnam War that took the lives of more than 55,000 American troops and several million North and South Vietnamese. Did we as a nation learn anything from that bloody debacle? Apparently not much. Then shock and awe was brought down upon the nation of Iraq in March 2003 in what has been described as one of the worst foreign policy blunders in the history of America. This time, have we finally learned our lesson? Maybe not as Iran appears to be directly in the crosshairs of the perpetrators of endless war.

America is now teetering on the brink of repeating the same mistakes once again as the Bush/Cheney administration appears to be bent on the initiation of another preemptive war in the Middle East and this time it is Iran that is being groomed as the next potential target.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

This saber rattling, the beating of the drums of war aimed directly at Iran now is heard continuously. Bush and Cheney make constant references to the threat that Iran poses. General Petraeus, commander of US forces in Iraq, and Ambassador Crocker were quite clear in accusing Iran of supporting the insurgency in Iraq. Senators "Holy Joe" Lieberman and Lindsey Graham, the fawning puppets of John McCain, are trying to make the case to label Iran and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the reincarnation of Saddam Hussein and his evil empire. Will Iran and Ahmadinejad be the next problem that will be "addressed"? Is this déjà vu all over again, or what?

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish ... 3231.shtml


First Iraq, now Iran. Bush is still sleepwalking. Here we go again ...


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2008 3:01 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:23 am
Posts: 452
McCain's Ambien Use: a Security Threat?

Sun., May 25, 2008

In a presidential race marked by references to preparedness in the face of the 3 a.m. call, the revelation that presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain has taken the sleeping pill Ambien during his travels raises concerns that the rare side effects of the medication could impair his judgment.

http://empowher.com/news/2008/05/26/


And what are those side effects?

Sleepwalking, and eating or driving while not fully awake, with amnesia for the event, have been reported. If you experience any of these behaviors contact your provider immediately.

http://www.ambiencr.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group