Article

2007-05-27 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2007-05-27 07:45|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 Andrew J. Bacevich teaches history and international relations at Boston University.

Number of courses taken in military history in during his studies? Betcha 0.

One of the aspects of the 'Great Captains of History' as the 19th Century author Theodore Dodge would dub them, was the concept of taking the fight to the enemies territory and force the enemy to fight the battle in terms moat advantageous to the means and abilities of the Great Captain's forces.

It would do certain intellectuals good to read about the period of our own history in the second half of the 19th century and the social, political, and military environment of 'closing the west'. It was messy, uncoordinated, costly in lives and material, and had its dark moments. Had near sighted individuals triumphed in halting that development, the manpower and vast resources of the region would never had been available to confront the powers of authoritarianism and totalitarianism in the 20th century. Yet, the parallels with our own times are ignored just because it would force the honest ones to acknowledge that as anyone in 1870 couldn't see the outcome of that mismanaged efforts, neither can they be oracles to the events happening now.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-05-27 08:55|| 2007-05-27 08:55|| Front Page Top

#2 Procopius2K, you are wrong. At least about this dad.

Professor Bacevich graduated from West Point, and retired from the Army as a Lieutenant Colonel. The arguments he has made against the war have been considered, principled, and I find myself agreeing with some of them. (I am running out the door now, maybe later I'll come back ond elaborate.)

And don't dismiss his 'deaf ears' argument, we're experiencing the exact same thing with this wretched immigration debacle.

Dr. Bacevich is no mouth breathing lefty, he is a warrior who has lost his son. This weekend let's honor his grief, and thank him for his own service.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-05-27 09:56|| 2007-05-27 09:56|| Front Page Top

#3 A lot of officers I know who served in Vietnam saw the Iraq war and continuing ops there through the eyes of an Army that was drained, broken and then underfunded as - in their view - a casualty of politics, just as with the Vietnam war.

Most aren't angry that we went, or even that the Iraqis aren't stepping up as much / fast / widespread as we'd like. But they are deeply angry when they feel that both (say) Rumsfeld as SECDEF and now Congress are using and discarding them without giving them full support.

Bacevich is very definitely among the Colin Powell, make it very hard for politicians to send us to war in that way again, camp. His books have had that them for a good while now.

Posted by occasional observer 2007-05-27 10:47|| 2007-05-27 10:47|| Front Page Top

#4 Pfeh. clicked before I had a chance to edit that.

Wanted to add that the anti-Iraq-war camp has begun a serious outreach to parts of the Army. Doonesbury's Gary Trudeau was invited to address the cadet corps at West Point this spring, and the invitation came from a military faculty leader. Bacevich isn't the only voice out there expressing this sort of opinion. We all had better make our support of them very vocal and clear -- the last election had a very corrosive impact on their trust of the American people and political and senior military leaders to value their sacrifice and use it wisely.

Posted by occasional observer 2007-05-27 10:52|| 2007-05-27 10:52|| Front Page Top

#5 To whom do Kennedy, Kerry and Lynch listen? We know the answer: to the same people who have the ear of George W. Bush and Karl Rove -- namely, wealthy individuals and institutions.Money buys access and influence. Money greases the process that will yield us a new president in 2008. When it comes to Iraq, money ensures that the concerns of big business, big oil, bellicose evangelicals and Middle East allies gain a hearing. By comparison, the lives of U.S. soldiers figure as an afterthought.

that paragraph of drivel alone would make me turn him off. He's writing emotionally here

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-05-27 10:57|| 2007-05-27 10:57|| Front Page Top

#6 Yup. But he's not alone in that last sentiment you boldfaced, Frank.

The people I know who could get out at this point aren't doings so in numbers, yet. And we have lots of young people joining.

But many O3s-O6s are looking at the Congressional debate on funding for them and adding in all the dances like withdrawing from Fallujah the first time and handing it back to the jihadis and Ba'athists. They are becoming convinced that no one is effectively taking Iran on at a time when the Iranians really are waging war on us in Iraq. And they are, in many cases, staying in uniform primarily out of loyalty to their troops and their peers, for a while longer.

I worry a lot about that erosion of spirit and trust. It's not a blazing public fire, but it's smoldering in a lot of places. We've asked a lot of our men and women in uniform, especially the Army over the last 6 years. They need funding, new equipment, and above all a very public commitment from the people and leaders of this country to support and honor them.

Posted by occasional observer 2007-05-27 11:31|| 2007-05-27 11:31|| Front Page Top

#7 The focus of West Point and the Army has been the WWII legacy. It is not the full legacy of the American Army or its experience. It ignores its own history of its first hundred years. The political issues, the funding issues, the strategy and tactical issues are nothing new. We experienced it before in the 19th century and the record is there if anyone wants to read. Excepts from Frontier Regulars by Robert Utley -

Chapter 3: The Problem of Doctrine. Three special conditions set this mission apart from more orthodox military assignments. First, it pitted the army against an enemy who usually could not be clearly identified and differentiated from kinsmen not disposed at the moment to be enemies. Indians could change with bewildering rapidity from friend to foe to neutral, and rarely could one be confidently distinguished from another...Second, Indian service placed the army in opposition to a people that aroused conflicting emotions... And third, the Indians mission gave the army a foe unconventional both in the techniques and aims of warfare... He fought on his own terms and, except when cornered or when his family was endangered, declined to fight at all unless he enjoyed overwhelming odds...These special conditions of the Indian mission made the U.S. Army not so much a little army as a big police force...for a century the army tried to perform its unconventional mission with conventional organization and methods. The result was an Indian record that contained more failures than successes and a lack of preparedness for conventional war that became painfully evident in 1812, 1846, 1861, and 1898.

Chapter 4. The Army, Congress, and the People. Shermans frontier regulars endured not only the physical isolation of service at remote border posts; increasingly in the postwar years they found themselves isolated in attitudes, interests, and spirit from other institutions of government and society and, indeed from the American people themselves...Reconstruction plunged the army into tempestuous partisan politics. The frontier service removed it largely from physical proximity to population and, except for an occasional Indian conflict, from public awareness and interest. Besides public and congressional indifference and even hostility, the army found its Indian attitudes and policies condemned and opposed by the civilian officials concerned with Indian affairs and by the nations humanitarian community.

Does that sound familiar? The corrupt Indian Bureau, inept policies, local political interference, equipment deficiencies, rules of engagement that yo-yo depending who's in Washington this year, etc, etc, etc.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-05-27 12:06|| 2007-05-27 12:06|| Front Page Top

#8 P2K - you Nic evokes a certain sense of history. Is that professional or an avocation?

BTW - I think you're good at it!

Posted by Bobby 2007-05-27 17:39|| 2007-05-27 17:39|| Front Page Top

23:59 RD
23:04 SR-71
22:34 Frank G
22:27 Bright Pebbles
22:06 RD
21:58 Bobby
21:54 mhw
21:53 Old Patriot
21:46 Bobby
21:44 DarthVader
21:20 Redneck Jim
21:15 Cyber Sarge
21:12 ed
21:08 Redneck Jim
20:59 Redneck Jim
20:51 Tony (UK)
20:41 Pappy
20:36 Frank G
20:32 Redneck Jim
20:18 Redneck Jim
20:18 trailing wife
20:11 Zenster
20:08 Frank G
20:05 Zenster