The folly behind sending more troops to Iraq.

Calling For Backup
by Ray McGovern

The folly behind sending more troops to Iraq.

http://tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/10356

Ray McGovern chaired National Intelligence Estimates during his 27-year career and had high respect for the expertise and dedication of INR analysts. Ray is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes alumni from CIA, INR, and other intelligence agencies. He is now co-director of the Servant Leadership School, an inner-city outreach ministry in Washington, DC.

--
"It would take 500,000 men to do it and even then it could not be done." So spoke General Jacques Leclerc, the French war hero sent to Vietnam in 1946 to estimate how many troops would be required to take back that country. Leclerc's estimate would still be valid two decades later when more than 500,000 U.S. troops were in Vietnam, as Barbara Tuchman notes in The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam.

Fast forward to General Eric Shinseki's testimony to Congress on Feb. 25, 2003—just three weeks before the invasion of Iraq. When asked how many troops would be needed to secure post-war Iraq, Shinseki said "several hundred thousand." Three days later, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, dismissed Shinseki's estimate as "far off the mark." But it is now clear that they had no idea what the occupation of Iraq would require.

The Meaning of Fallujah

"There are no insurgents in Fallujah," says Mohammed Latif, once a senior intelligence officer in Saddam Hussein's regime and now commander of the Iraqi brigade controlling the city. Washington has been blaming the conflict in Fallujah partly on "insurgents." Resistance to the occupation is a far more accurate description, and there is plenty of that in Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq.

Words make a big difference. In Vietnam we labeled the Vietnamese Communists "terrorists" and "insurgents." This obscured for far too long the reality that they comprised a deeply nationalist movement determined to resist any and all invaders—however powerful. In this kind of war, kill ratios have little meaning. Killed: 58,000 US troops; 2 to 3 million Vietnamese.

..more..

to procure independence of Vietnam from the French (during the "peace talks" of 1919 following WWI). He was rebuffed. How history would be different if he had been given an audience and support.

Wilson was supposed to tell the French to leave Indo-china? I am sure they would have done so. Kennedy got us in so deep we couldn't leave. he is the villain here. His stupid assassination plots against Castro did him in.

didn't even get a chance to make his case. He didn't originally start out with a plan for violent overthrow of the empirical regime. He was a lawyer and used a lawful process but it was futile.

**Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap is perhaps the most important figure in the early history of communist Vietnam -- with the exception of Ho Chi Minh. At the end of World War II, Ho named Giap commander in chief of the Viet Minh forces fighting French colonial rule. Giap orchestrated the defeat of the French at the battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1953 and remained minister of defense of the newly independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam. He was the chief North Vietnamese military leader in the subsequent war against U.S. forces. This interview, which was conducted in May 1996, has been translated from Vietnamese.


http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/11/interviews/giap /
On the U.S. leadership during the war:

In general, I must say they were the most intelligent people, with certain talents such as military, political and diplomacy skills. They were intelligent people. That was the first point that I want to say. The second point I want to say is that they knew little about Vietnam and her people. They didn't understand our will to maintain independence and equality between nations even though these are stated in President Jefferson's manifestation. And so they made mistakes. They did not know the limits of power. ... No matter how powerful you are there are certain limits, and they did not understand it well. ...

The people in the White House believed that Americans would definitely win and there is not chance of defeat. There is a saying which goes, "If you know the enemy and you know yourself, you would win every single battle." However, the Americans fought the Vietnamese, but they did not know much about Vietnam or anything at all about the Vietnamese people.. Vietnam is an old nation founded in a long history before the birth of Christ. ... The Americans knew nothing about our nation and her people. American generals knew little about our war theories, tactics and patterns of operation. ...

During the war everyone in the country would fight and they do so following the Vietnamese war theory. We have a theory that is different from that of the Russians and that of the Americans. The Americans did not understand that. They did not know or understand our nation; they did not know our war strategies. They could not win. How could they win? As our president said, there was nothing more precious than independence and freedom. We had the spirit that we would govern our own nation; we would rather sacrifice than be slaves.

<snip>

--------------------------------
Apr 30,2004

Giap Recalls Vietnam Wins Vs. France, U.S.

By TINI TRAN Associated Press Writer

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VIETNAM_GIAP_REMEMBERS?SITE...

HANOI, Vietnam (AP) -- The frail and tiny man who
defeated two superpowers returned to the spotlight
Friday to talk of triumphs past and deliver words of
warning to the Americans at war in Iraq.

"Any forces that would impose their will on other
nations will certainly face defeat," said Vo Nguyen
Giap, the legendary general whose strategies wore out
the French colonial regime and then the U.S. Army.

Giap is 92 now, the last of Vietnam's giants in a
30-year war to shake off colonial rule and unite the
country under communism. What brought him to a rare
meeting with journalists was two landmark
anniversaries: The fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975,
and the defeat of French colonial forces at the epic
siege of Dien Bien Phu, 50 years ago next Friday.

With critics of the Iraq war likening it to America's
Vietnam experience, Giap's opinion was eagerly sought,
but the man considered one of history's foremost
military strategists prefaced his reply with caution,
saying he didn't know the specifics of the Iraqi
situation.

He offered this: "All nations fighting for their
legitimate interests and sovereignty will surely win."

..more..
=================

Bush would swear to it!