Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's LBJ Moment..........

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:02 PM
Original message
Obama's LBJ Moment..........


by Harvey Wasserman | September 28, 2009 - 10:26am

Lyndon Johnson was once on the verge of becoming one of America's greatest presidents.

But with a single wrong turn into Vietnam, LBJ plunged himself and the nation into a ghastly tragedy that still makes us all weep and bleed.

It is NOW! up to us to make sure Barack Obama does not do the same.

Even the corporate media shows signs of understanding the parallels between Vietnam and Afghanistan. So many of us are alive today who remember March, 1965, and all the horror that followed, that there is simply no excuse for allowing this lethal mistake to be repeated.

LBJ inherited the momentum of the New Frontier, the murder of John Kennedy and a huge 1964 electoral mandate. He turned them into a string of civil rights and social welfare victories that still vastly enhance all our lives.

But LBJ also inherited from JFK the beginnings of the war in Vietnam. LBJ's choice was to escalate or pull out. Recent biographies indicate he had a strong premonition that the war was futile, and that it would do him in. A century from now, historians will still agonize over why he took the plunge anyway.

Likewise, Obama's most critical decision today does not have to do with health care or energy. There will be bills on both. How much they help or hurt us will be a matter for debate, and for future legislative and legal battles.

But there will be no grey area in Afghanistan. If Obama chains himself to some kind of "victory," he and what's left of our nation are doomed.

As in Vietnam, the goal would seem to be to install a regime run by the United States and to "pacify" the country into accepting it. The last foreigner to win like that in Afghanistan was Alexander the Great, about 2300 years ago. Since then the British and Soviets have been among the many to crash and burn in this "graveyard of great powers."

When LBJ escalated, the draft cards started burning and the protests began in earnest. But it was already too late. By 1968 more than 550,000 American troops were stuck in Southeast Asia and the war raged for yet another 7 years. Millions of Vietnamese and more than 58,000 Americans died. Tens of thousands were terminally traumatized. The toxic human, economic and ecological impacts still ravage both nations.

At some point, LBJ realized what he had done. His extant image is not of a victorious, canonized Lincoln or FDR, but of the exhausted shell of an on-his-way-out president, slumped over a table, listening to a tape from his son-in-law in Vietnam (the photo is by Jack Kightlinger, July 31, 1968).

Obama could all too easily share LBJ's fate. His mandate to make change is unmistakable and his potential for success is tangible.

But another trap has been set. He has inherited from George W. Bush the beginnings of a horrific quagmire. How he handles it will determine, more than any other decision, his future and that of a deeply wounded nation that still hasn't recovered from the Southeast Asian catastrophe.

LBJ apparently thought he could not "lose" Vietnam because right wingers would blame him for an ensuing "success of world communism."

Despite the billions spent in blood and treasure, the last Americans fled from a Saigon rooftop on April 30, 1975. No triumphant wave of global communist aggression ensued. By 1991, due largely to its fiasco in Afghanistan, the Soviet Union and the "world communist conspiracy" definitively disintegrated.

Today's right-wingers like Condolezza Rice shout that "losing Afghanistan" will mean more terror attacks. It's utter nonsense. But the warning, carried by the screaming Foxist media, is that unless he drags us all into Southwest Asia, Obama will be held personally responsible for all future mayhem.

Some White House advisors could well be saying the same thing, just as JFK's "Best and Brightest" warned LBJ not to pull out of Vietnam.


Today General Stanley McChrystal plays the role of William Westmoreland, the prime architect of Vietnam's military catastrophe. As did Westmoreland, McChrystal is telling the public an Afghan war can be won if only we "stay the course."

In the 1980s I debated Westmoreland on two college campuses. He told me, with a poker face, that we actually "won the war" by "buying time" for a set of non-communist Southeast Asian dictators (including Singapore's Lee Kwan Yew, Indonesia's Suharto and Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, all of whom brutalized their people and stuffed billions of dollars into their personal Swiss bank accounts).

If he prevails, General McChrystal may someday have similar things to say.

But we cannot let this happen. Afghanistan cannot be controlled any more than Vietnam could. Effectively fighting terror demands an intelligent, coordinated international effort, not a blundering unilateral plunge into yet another hopeless overseas quagmire.

It also requires a revived prosperity, a winning agenda for social justice, and a Bill of Rights that is honored and in tact.

All of this is in Obama's reach. But ONLY if he stays out of Aghanistan, and any other military quagmire that might beckon. That would include Iran, where the crisis has internationalized, and is of a very different sort.

THE REST OF THE ARTICLE at..............
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/24080
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
panader0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. "LBJ apparently thought he could not "lose" Vietnam because right wingers..." There is no evidence
that Obama harbors such views.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. LBJ lied to the voters and the country at large
LBJ lied to the voters when he said that American boys should not be doing the fighting that Asian boys should be doing (his words).

LBJ lied to the country when he told a stunned nation that North Vietnamese torpedo boats had attacked the US destroyer Maddox. The story was totally false, but it was used to get the Democratic Congress to pass the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, which opened the door to massive escalation of the war in Vietnam.

Read the resolution here: http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=98

Years later, after the truth of the Tonkin Gulf "incident" had become known, the Democratic Congress refused to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. They feared peace more than they feared the carnage of war (It was finally repealed in 1971).

The gods bless the memory of Senators Wayne Morse and Ernest Gruening. They were the lonely votes against the Tonkin War Resolution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. We must not repeat it...thanks for the extra, "Indiana Green." n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
4. Fairness when due
During Obama's campaign, he trumpeted the war in Afghanistan as the "true war" over Iraq. What has changed since then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prostomulgus Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. We could be out of Iraq and Afghanistan in 48 hours
With non-stop flights ferrying soldiers to the nearest safe harborage & leaving all of the equipment and supplies behind (we don't need that crap here anyway), we could be out of both places this Thursday. We should get out NOW!!!!

The world will think more highly of us if we do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 09:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. if Obama cannot already see Afghanistan is a lost cause
HE is a lost cause
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-28-09 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. Even the corporate media shows signs of understanding the parallels between Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Edited on Mon Sep-28-09 10:24 PM by Proud Liberal Dem
The corporate media is NOT your friend. They started in with the comparisons between Afghanistan and Vietnam nearly as soon as Obama took office IMHO because Obama felt that we should've been focusing our attention THERE instead of on Iraq for the past 8 years and is trying to salvage the failure of Bush's neglect. It's a bit strange that we didn't hear a lot about Afghanistan while Bush was in office, isn't it? I don't recall a lot of people, at least outside of the progressive community let alone in the corporate media, compare Iraq OR Afghanistan as "Bush's Vietnam" (or more accurate "Vietnams") As soon as Obama assumes office, Iraq is almost totally forgotten (probably because the corporate media desperately want us to forgot that that was Bushco's single biggest piece of s**t epic failure) and Afghanistan is now looming as "Obama's Vietnam". You surely don't think that's a coincidence, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyByNight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
9. As stated in the article, a cursory examination...
...of history should warn any foreign power from attempting to impose its imperial will upon Afghanistan.

It's Vietnam 3.0 and the parallels are horrifying: propping up a mind-numbingly corrupt government/head of state; the inherited nature of the conflict from one president to another; the lack of a clear objective; a military commander requesting more troops, to name a few examples.

How many more lives, how much treasure has to be sacrificed to the martial gods of the military-industrial complex? The empire is unsustainable.

Get. The. Fuck. Out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
invictus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-29-09 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
10. K&R. We must not let the neo-cons drag us into war with Iran either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC