Anti-War Success Is Not Failure

Thank goodness Charles Krauthammer is willing to share his wisdom with the Democrats, particularly to show those from Connecticut the error of their way. In Friday’s commentary he wrote that voters who tried to apply the lessons of the Vietnam War to the military orgy in Iraq and Afghanistan were dooming the Democratic party to another forty years in the political wilderness, not laying the groundwork for long term success.

Krauthammer suggests that it was the anti-war left wing of the Democratic party that ruined the Johnson presidency, spoiled the presidential chances of Humphrey, and put the party far outside the mainstream on foreign policy, ultimately preventing any national success (except the “idiosyncratic post-Watergate” accidental election of Jimmy Carter) until the Cold War had been won.

First, the Johnson presidency. The anti-war wing of the Democratic party did not make Johnson continue waging war. Perhaps if LBJ had succumbed more quickly to the anti-war members of his own party he would have been reelected, leaving behind a far different legacy. Johnson, like no president since, expressed a desire that the government actively better the lives of its citizens, especially those who had been least touched by the benefits of a Great Society. Johnson’s personal tragedy, his inability to get out of Vietnam, ruined his presidency, not the heart felt beliefs of many sincere Democrats that war in general must be avoided and the one in Vietnam must be ended.

Hubert Humphrey’s candidacy faced two major problems which when combined resulted in Nixon’s incredibly narrow victory. His first problem, of his own making, was his failure to say, “The war policy is Lyndon’s, not mine.” This cost him support from many people who liked his plans for America, but could see nothing but disaster in the war. Nixon’s “secret plan to end the war” was Humphrey’s other problem. If Nixon had a plan, it certainly was a secret – so secret that he couldn’t locate it after the election. If Nixon’s so-called plan to end the war wasn’t pandering to the anti-war sentiments of middle-America, I don’t know what it could be. Mr. Krauthammer seems to have forgotten that it was Nixon’s Republicans that benefited from its own anti-war electioneering – as unscrupulous as it was.

Unscrupulous? Perhaps I should have saved that word for the next Nixon campaign. The 1972 campaign proved to be, based on the indictments, resignations, and pardons that ensued, the most crooked of the modern era – up to that point. Nixonian tampering with the campaigns of the Democrats during the primary phase and then in the election itself leave wide open the question of who would have been inaugurated in 1973 had the election been honestly pursued. Krauthammer writes of a “newly reshaped McGovernite party” unable to deal with the post-Vietnam Cold War. Well, isn’t that something? The war Nixon had said he had a plan to end still had two and a half tragic years to go, strong Democratic candidates had been sabotaged, and Krauthammer puts the blame on anti-war Democrats.

The problem with Democrats lay not with an anti-war conscience, but with a Republican party led by a man without a conscience.

That seems familiar.

My Momma Says, Colonialist Is as Colonialist Does

In the news this morning I read that yesterday our president was briefed by our ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad. According to the president, Khalilzad delivered information about Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's recent trip to several Persian Gulf nations. Khalilzad was in position to give this information because he had accompanied al-Maliki on the trip.

I had to read that part again. The leader of a country, making a three nation tour to neighboring heads of state took along the ambassador from a nation thousands of miles away. How likely is it that when Bush goes to Mexico he will take with him the ambassador from China?

Looked at in this light, one might get the impression that the people al-Maliki visited had greater interest in a little face time with the U.S ambassador to Baghdad than with the leader of Baghdad. Yet, we are not to believe that Iraq is a colony of the United States.

We should be realistic about it. Not long ago our president had a weekend of meetings with his brain trust, so to speak, at Camp David. We were told the principal topic was the Iraq situation – the war, the insurgency, the blossoming of freedom. [My guess is that the principal topic was actually how to cover up our total incompetence in fighting the war, overcoming the insurgency, and planting democratic freedom. But that’s just my opinion.] According to the stories released by the White House, Bush cleverly retired early (if only) on the last evening of the meeting, only to sneak out of the compound and hop a flight to Baghdad.

The story goes on that he flew without incident through Iraqi airspace, arrived unannounced at Bagdad’s airport, was whisked by chopper to the American embassy in the Green Zone, and from there telephoned al-Maliki to announce his arrival and tell al-Maliki to come over to the embassy for a meeting, and to bring his cabinet. I should not have been as surprised as I was that al-Maliki complied. My surprise arose from the notion that a head of state would fly unannounced in to the airspace of a sovereign nation and make a demand that the host head of state come to the visitor’s embassy, along with the cabinet.

Could we imagine Putin, for instance, getting into Russia’s embassy in Washington by helicopter from Dulles airport without NORAD and the air traffic controllers knowing about it, and then demanding that Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld an the gang, come over to the embassy for a sit down? No, probably not. But then, we are not a colony of a superpower.

Iraq is.

Community Theatre

Support for community theatre in Loudoun County should not slip.

What can you do? Make it a point to attend "The Odd Couple" at Old Stone School in Hillsboro for one of the performances July 14, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 28, 29, 30.

And above all, read the reviews of local theatrical performances in The Purcellville Gazette.