Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Bush's Big Gambit

By Stephen Pizzo, News for Real. Posted June 30, 2005.


If imitation is the highest form of flattery, then ex-presidents Johnson and Nixon must be (the only ones) feeling good about Bush's speech on Tuesday.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Stephen Pizzo

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On Tuesday night, I poured myself a double scotch before watching the President’s speech. As it turned out, I needed it.

As I have noted in the past, I’m an old fart. Five more years and I will qualify for both Social Security and Medicare – if they’re still around. The trouble with getting old is that almost every day is another déjà vu experience. It seems the human race suffers from a nearly flat learning curve, because we keep repeating past mistakes with alarming frequency and enthusiasm.

Here’s what I mean: I took Bush’s speech and compared it to the speeches of two former presidents, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. The speeches were, like Tuesday's, given at times when Americans were increasingly questioning the reasoning and logic behind the war in Vietnam.

The Selfless-Sacrifice Gambit

Bush (6/28/05): "Our mission in Iraq is clear: we're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. We are removing a source of violence and instability and laying the foundation of peace for our children and our grandchildren."

Johnson (1965): "We fight (in Vietnam) because we must fight if we are to live in a world where every country can shape its own destiny, and only in such a world will our own freedom be finally secure."

The Threat-to-America Gambit

Bush (6/28/05): "The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of September the 11th,  if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like bin Laden. For the sake of our nation's security, this will not happen on my watch. We have more work to do, and there will be tough moments that test America's resolve."

Nixon (1969): "Our defeat and humiliation in South Vietnam without question would promote recklessness in the councils of those great powers who have not yet abandoned their goals of world conquest. This would spark violence wherever our commitments help maintain the peace -- in the Middle East, in Berlin, eventually even in the Western Hemisphere."

The I-Listen-To-Military-Experts Gambit

Bush (6/28/05): "Some Americans ask me, 'If completing the mission is so important, why don't you send more troops?' If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them."

Johnson (1968): "On many occasions I have told the American people that we would send to Vietnam those forces that are required to accomplish our mission there. So, with that as our guide, we have previously authorized a force level of approximately 525,000."

The They-Are-Animals Gambit

Bush (6/28/05): "The terrorists... are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to take. We see the nature of the enemy in terrorists who exploded car bombs along a busy shopping street in Baghdad, including one outside a mosque. We see the nature of the enemy in terrorists who sent a suicide bomber to a teaching hospital in Mosul. We see the nature of the enemy in terrorists who behead civilian hostages and broadcast their atrocities for the world to see."

Johnson (1965): "And it is a war of unparalleled brutality. Simple farmers are the targets of assassination and kidnapping. Women and children are strangled in the night because their men are loyal to the government. And helpless villagers are ravaged by sneak attacks. Large-scale raids are conducted on towns, and terror strikes in the heart of cities."

The Gift-of-Freedom Gambit

Bush (6/28/05): " America's mission in Iraq is to defeat an enemy and give strength to a friend -- a free, representative government that is an ally in the war on terror and a beacon of hope in a part of the world that is desperate for reform."

Johnson (1965): "Our objective is the independence of South Viet-Nam, and its freedom from attack. We want nothing for ourselves-only that the people of South Viet-Nam be allowed to guide their own country in their own way."

The Vietnamization/Iraqization Gambit

Bush (6/28/05): "Today, Iraq has more than 160,000 security forces trained and equipped for a variety of missions. Iraqi forces have fought bravely, helping to capture terrorists and insurgents…"

Johnson (1968): "…the Government of South Vietnam started the drafting of 19-year-olds on March 1st. On May 1st, the Government will begin the drafting of 18-year-olds. Last month, 10,000 men volunteered for military service--that was two and a half times the number of volunteers during the same month last year. Since the middle of January, more than 48,000 South Vietnamese have joined the armed forces--and nearly half of them volunteered to do so."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books, including "Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans," which was nominated for a Pulitzer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What Bush said; and didn't say
Posted by: dearkitty on Jun 30, 2005 12:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for pointing out these interesting parallels to the Vietnam war era.

There are still more points to be analyzed in what Bush said. And in what he didn't say: not mentioning WMD, which was in about every speech on Iraq up to March 2003; not mentioning exit strategy; and never mentioning he himself might have made even just one mistake. More analysis and reactions here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

eyespy
Posted by: eyespy on Jun 30, 2005 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The goal of the insurgency is not even not to lose--it is not to give up. And these people will never give up. How could they? They are fighting for their lives! If members of your family were taken hostage, beaten, and killed by foreign invaders, you would do whatever possible to hold those reponsible accountable. We have done precisely that to almost every family in Iraq. Because we cannot be held accountable in any other way, they have decided to fight us. And they will win. History demonstrates time and again that an armed insurgent population simply cannot be subdued, and ignorance of this fact illustrates the lack of vision of the Gang of Four. Our post-colonial allies cried out to save us from ourselves, knowing firsthand what havoc a few villagers with AK's can wreak. Yet blunder on we did, our own empire still firmly intact and waiting for its next addition--as it has since 1959, in spite of nearly 50 years of ruthless imperialist warmongering. One thinks of Rome and wonders how long it all can last.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

History Repeats Itself
Posted by: acaryatid on Jun 30, 2005 4:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for the deja vu details. It does seem like a rerun except, 9/11 replaced the Tonkin Gulf and sex, drugs and rock and roll are ads for prescriptions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: History Repeats Itself Posted by: monkeywrench
Mr.
Posted by: robchapman on Jun 30, 2005 4:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was interesting that even though Bush repeated the 9/11 mantra six times in a short fifteen minute speech, he never quoted his 9/13/01 speech or even referred to it.
Remember the media's glorious praise of that speech?
It is such s shame that this pygmy Bush is able to control military forces.
Robert Chapman
Ithaca, New York

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It may get much worse
Posted by: sheherezade on Jun 30, 2005 4:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What remains to be seen is whether or not the attack against Iraq will escalate to attacks against Iran and Syria thereby establishing an American curtain of war from Central Asia to Israel. It is well know that Israel wishes (us or themselves) to attack Irans capability to produce nuclear power. Key Democrats who support finishing the job of blunder in Iraq, (work, work, work) are running for President in '08 and we may wind up with another administration continuuing the war as a matter of policy, not wanting to appear as if the war was lost during their term. We are on a slippery slope, going down, and the only hope of avoiding more war is to end the occupation of Iraq and of Palestine immediately.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Leader
Posted by: AdamSelene40 on Jun 30, 2005 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What really chillled my guts was the fact that Bush chose to deliver this speech un front of a captive audience of soldiers --

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Our Leader Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Our Leader Posted by: Mountaineer
The President offered same excuses
Posted by: zeitgeist1979 on Jun 30, 2005 7:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After listening to Bush’s speech I was finally convinced that we should pull our troops out of Iraq as soon as possible. I am fed up with the President making excuses about his miscalculations with the same tired line “This is just playing right into the hands of the enemy!” or “That’s just what the enemy wants!” I also wonder the following: “who long can it take for this administration to finally get their act together and train the Iraqis to defend themselves?” Where are all those hundreds of billions of dollars that we shell out constantly going then?

I heard nothing of some practical no-brainer plans that others have already proposed and that the President chooses to ignore. I heard nothing about more cooperation from NATO and I heard nothing of attempts being made to get Iraq’s neighbors to cooperate to secure the borders. In addition, I heard nothing of a time frame on when Iraqi troops will be effectively trained (something that was supposed to be done right in the first place). I heard nothing of negotiating with the insurgents to bring conflict to an end. I also heard nothing about really supporting our troops by getting their act together and cover the one billion dollar shortfall in funding for veterans’ care this year. Lastly, I heard nothing about increasing funding for armor and necessary supplies for our troops over in Iraq and Afghanistan.

All the signs are there that indicate that getting into Iraq was a wrong decision and the core of the matter is this: “is something that was wrong to begin with worth continuing, not to mention continuing it wrongly?” The comparisons between how we stayed for 50-plus years in Europe after the war ended are uttery ridiculous. In Europe, or in Japan for that matter, we did not have insurgents resisting us with bullets/rockets flying off every day. We also went into war with them in the first place because they declared war on us and attacked us, which Iraq never did. Let us set a realistic deadline so that it puts pressure on the White House to get cracking because otherwise I believe they will take their sweet time to keep us there indefenitely. No matter how long we stay there we will always be the occupiers. That means that in many ways we ARE the fuel that keeps the insurgency going because as long as we stay there insurgents will want to rise up primarily not because they hate “freedom” but because they hate the “invaders.”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The more things change, the more they stay the same. . .
Posted by: redstarwraith on Jun 30, 2005 7:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I, unlike the author of this article, do not consider myself an "old fart" -- not that there's anything wrong with age, but I was a pre-teen throughout most of the Vietnam era. Still I practice my own brand of "patriotism" meaning: when the vets from Vietnam War say that there are nearly identical mistakes we are making in Iraq, I listen to them. Oh, admittedly that's not always as easy as it sounds. You have to tune out all the rapturous, glossy-eyed "true believers" singing "God Bless America" as if it were some sacred mantra as they stick 'Ol Glory in your face, but it can be accomplished. I also did something very simple and easy: I went to my local public library and checked out the PBS video series on the Vietnam War. "Vietnam: The Television War" I believe it's called. I also did a little reading to fill in the gaps too. It's worth the small effort and investment of time, not because it'll make one an expert on Vietnam, but because as the author claimed, you can see how the president's speech was recycled, and why it was presented at this particular time in history, and for whose benefit. Of course you can then easily see that this is nothing radically new, either in form or content.
Education. It can be a beautiful thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More history repeating itself?
Posted by: Koog on Jun 30, 2005 7:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a thought...we all know that Bush has aspirations to wage war with Iran. On Nov.4, 1979, Iran took 52 Americans hostage, and held them captive for 444 days. 25 years later, 5 of those hostages now say that Iran's President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was one of their captors. Now maybe it's just me but doesn't this have the smell of the Swift Boat Veterans?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More history repeating itself? Posted by: dennyduke@earthlink.net
Windspear
Posted by: Windspear on Jun 30, 2005 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Has Bush redefined US interest in Iraq in a way that is different from Vietnam:

Bush (6/28/05): "Our mission in Iraq is clear: we're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. We are removing a source of violence and instability and laying the foundation of peace for our children and our grandchildren."

Are we building a puppet state whose foreign policies will advance US interests in the area? A state that will no longer initiate hostilities against US allies and will be cooperative with US efforts to gather intelligence on terrorism. The freedom that is alluded to probably refers mostly to Iran, whose religous links to the Shiite majority, represents a threat to US Iraq relations.

If keeping Iraq free from unfriendly Iranian influence is a goal of the US policy, we are likely to keep a significant military and political presence in Iraq for an extensive period at an unaffordable price.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It will get worse and it will get better.
Posted by: lonl on Jun 30, 2005 8:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stephen Pizzo's article and the various well-thought comments show that older people neither forget nor do we stop using our brains, while younger people also have good brains and the ability to educate themselves on life-and-death issues. All this is quite contrary to the idiocy the Bush administration tries to foist upon the public - idiocy within which it, itself, is mired.

"Lifting a rock to drop it on one's own foot" is the operative proverb here. Unfortunately, the Iraqi people, and, down the line, so many more including ourselves can and probably will end up doing most of the suffering. While the core support of Bush et al will go on in its gated communities sopping up the wealth we all produce and for which so many, seemingly, must die.

Sheherezade's comments in this thread strike me as very clear, very correct and very much the reason why politics tied to the Democratic Party currently offers no hope of averting the danger of a new world war.

Of course, the imperial project is unsustainable and unwinnable. Just the adventure in Iraq is draining US resources and putting new burdens on people every day. But the feckless and complicit Dems go on fearing to take the one step that could enable them to clearly differentiate themselves: calling unequivocally for the US to get out of Iraq.

It is interesting that, on all sides, various lessons are being drawn from the Vietnam experience about what swung the US people irrevocably against continuing that war. An article in today's Washington Post gives an interesting account of the administration's desperate thinking on this issue. My view is that political figures with any grip on the actual levers of power only moved them when the people's festival of mass action was well underway with demos, widespread opposition in the ranks of the military, much viable alternative media, cultural upheaval, etc.. Many of these factors are already again coming into play. Keep up the good work, kids! We've just begun to fight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One telling difference
Posted by: CJC on Jun 30, 2005 8:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nixon says "This week I will have to sign 83 letters to mothers, fathers, wives and loved ones of men who have given their lives for America in Vietnam..."

I don't believe Bush even signs these letters. That's left to Rumsfeld, who was using a signature machine, until that tawdry fact was revealed.

I don't think we should really be surprised, even if we're horrified, at the similarity of the boiler-plate prose to that used by Johnson and Nixon.
Just as there was no good explanation for what we were doing in Vietnam there is none for Iraq. Bush, it turns out, had nothing to say. Even his hand-picked Fort Bragg audience found almost nothing to applaud. They know that Bush et al are all chickenhawks and that none of the children of the ruling classes are volunteering for military service - not the Bush twins, not the cheerful summer college interns at the Cato Institute etc etc etc.
I agree with AdamSelene40 that the choice of audience is chilling. It would be interesting to compare Bush's choice of platforms for these presidential addresses to the nation with those of previous presidents. If he sat in the Oval Office he'd have to look into the camera.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Kudos my man or .....woman!!!! Posted by: WhatNow?
No Mistakes, It's the Plan
Posted by: nakis on Jun 30, 2005 9:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The more I read about what the Bush administration is doing. The more propaganda they spout to further their goals the more it becomes clear.

The necons and Bush adminstration are not making any mistakes (none of significant consequence yet). They are doing exactly what they want. And will continue to do so until a massive wave of Americas demand change. Even if the majority is against what they do they will just make another speach like this one.
As opposed to the opinions here, Bush doesn't have to win the fight against the insurgencies. It would be a grand bonus but they have won already. The will of the conquered never matter much to the will of the conquerer. As long as the conquerer can throw more lives against the will of the conquered.
They never planned on leaving Iraq and never will unless forced to do it. They need to secure the oil futures of the region. They need the oil flow from the mideast (including Caspian sea region).

This speach was never meant to convince anyone of anything. If it does great. It's intent is only a stalling tactic to the rising opposition. They are not in hot water yet. Or even close. They have plans and power to back them up even if they are pushed to the wall.

They are happy with what they have done so far. They are well on their way to more oil/land grabs.

It's a war. Not a war on terror. As they claim. It's a war on fear. Fear in their souls. It's war on themselves. They are just projecting it outward.
It's a war of those dedicated to protecting life, liberty and a viable future for all on this planet against those who are so fearful they have to lie, steal, cheat and murder to try to gain what they believe is security. A security that can only be had by sacrificing others to attain. A security that is fleeting and unsustainable as every other empire has proven throughout history.

We have to wage this war against the foes of a sustainable future for every human being on the planet. We all must work together to move forward for all to survive. We must fight against this insanity that gave birth to WWII, Vietnam and every other war. Fight it without violence. It's the only way we can truly win.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why don't we have an "army of willing"
Posted by: xyz2002 on Jun 30, 2005 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would propose to form an "army of willing" for all of those neo-con to sign up to fight in Iraq, starting with Bush's kids. This could solve many current problems and show us those guys are realy believe what they are telling us. We could also them to donate money to a Patriot Fund to support Iraq war and see how much they will donate. That will show their true color for sure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bring’m on!
Posted by: IanA on Jun 30, 2005 1:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stephen Pizzo included the quote "And we fight today because terrorists want to attack our country and kill our citizens, and Iraq is where they are making their stand….." , he missed the bit alluding again to 9/11 about “We are fighting them there so that we don’t have to fight them here”. Also he missed the subtle comparison of the 9/11 lie and the Bay of Tonkin lie.

Is this an invitation? Is he inviting terrorists to America? Is it a dare to test America’s new and improved Home Land Security?

The Bush administration has been shown to have lied about the reasons for war, about working to “prevent” war, about WMD, about Iraq’s uranium and aluminium tubes acquisition, about links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, etc., lies to justify the unjustifiable, a criminal war of aggression.

Bush asks us “Not to forget the lessons of 9/11”

The Bush administration deliberately ignored all advise of a known and imminent threat of attack on the US. 9/11 was no surprise. The many unanswered questions are not that important. Even the degree of involvement of individuals in any such conspiracy if shown is not so important. You do not have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that these criminals lie and that the Bush cabal has already used 9/11 to justify the unjustifiable; the murder of hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis in a war against a “noun”. 9/11 is used as a justification to abrogate Treaties, trample Conventions, alaying human rights, kidnap, torture, avoid legal constraint.

Learn the lesson of 9/11 America! Your president is now inviting another attack. Perhaps another group of Mussad have infiltrated an Al Qaeda cell coordinated by CIA/FBI channels. They may now be preparing. No, not to prevent it. But your Great Leader Bush is certainly ready to exploit it AGAIN.

Why, you ask would your president want to see your country attacked? Learn the lesson of 9/11, that’s what he told you! You are asking questions, doubting his intention, second-guessing his policy. His popularity is slipping. Of course Nikis is right (see the comment above) “There is No Mistake. It’s the plan. So my American friends, be ready. Your next 9/11 is just on the horizon, but this time I hope you know who the terrorist is or have you still not learned the lesson?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Presidential Yada Yada
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Jun 30, 2005 4:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the hell was that crap George was throwing at us the other night in his 30 minutes of madness? Was it his greatest hits from his 2004 campaign speeches? He kept repeating "9/11", "9/11", '9/11" over and over. He has reduced the once proud office of President to a one trick pony act without the dog.
His altered sense of reality and chickenhawk administration have backed US forces into a corner where the only thing they are fighting for is their lives and their buddies. Iraq has become a giant sucking hole that will continue to swallow US forces, finances, and thousands of hapless Iraqis.
Heck he didn't even mention the 9/11 Saudi Arabian Terrorist Pilots - why aren't we fighting terrorism in Saudi Arabia. I guess he "forgot" about the war in Afganistan, we still remember the Talaban and Osama, the real terrorist behind 9/11.
I support our troops, let's get them out of that hellhole called Iraq before we loose more in what has become George Bush's No-Win War.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The worst terrorist of them all is...
Posted by: han on Jun 30, 2005 5:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is a neutral summary of all the facts surrounding 9/11

http://911review.org/

Looking at the facts as presented here one can only come to one conclusion: 911 was an inside job.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush got smirks
Posted by: Michiganman on Jun 30, 2005 8:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was it just me or did others notice SMIRKS on the faces of some of the soldiers shown during the speech? Darn didn't get those edited out. Also I find it incredible that many of the mainstream whore news stations actually related that someone from the bush team started the ONLY applause during the speech. Perhaps the armor is beginning to crack? Let's hope so.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks
Posted by: carolecraig on Jul 4, 2005 12:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A good read and it is always a good thing to remember that last time round the bad guys didn't win.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]