Buddy Is Only Half A Word
In the seventies, after the Americans had pulled out of Vietnam, the South was still doing okay. Fragile, but okay.
Then the US Congress pulled all its supporting funding.
Only then did we see the helicopter evacuation of Saigon, the millions in the killing fields, the deaths of the boat people in exodus, the “reeducation” camps, the privation and misery and utter waste of everything the American vet had fought to support.
Whatever side of the war one was on, this much is true: Many, many, many more people died, and died hard, after this capricious removal of support after promising it. (Me, I was on the “where’s my dad and could I have some juice and my toy bunny” side.)
Apparently Murtha forgot this little factoid. Since, you know, he was there at the time and would have been a special kind of dead to not have been frustrated by the waste. Extra Murtha classy points for doing this with the Prez out of country, and arranging for lots of press coverage–nice of you to be so loud about your lack of spine, there, mister.
Greyhawk writes well about it. Point Five at least can laugh about it. Malkin notes that he said the same thing last year, just with less of a Media Opportunity. Lots of links, lots of people commenting.
Me, I’m too annoyed at Murtha. Thanks, buddy.
Semper frickin’ Fi.
9 Responses to “Buddy Is Only Half A Word”
Trackback URL for Buddy Is Only Half A Word: http://gmapalumni.org/chapomatic/wp-trackback.php?p=1325
November 18th, 2005 at 6:56 am
Fantastic post. Thanks!
November 18th, 2005 at 7:59 am
Supporters of the war are playing this wrong, with all due respect. When somebody like Murtha–by all measures a moderate/populist Democrat, from a blue-collar Rust Belt district, and a combat veteran with a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts who voted for the war and spent 37 years in the Marine Corps Reserve–publically calls for withdrawal from Iraq, and the best that the Bush administration can come up with is shrill namecalling, we’re in trouble.
(Murtha is, per the administration’s press secretary, “endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party.” I won’t even go into what some of the more excitable bloggers are calling him. Here’s a hint, guys: Check out Murtha’s voting record; he couldn’t have less in common with these guys for the most part; he happens to agree with them on *one issue.* And Murtha, as the senior member and former chair of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, has *considerable* credibility on the Hill on military issues, making this all the more devastating.)
Instead of being dismissive and insulting, perhaps we should explain why he’s wrong. In detail. Without namecalling and handwaving. In re: support for the war, we’ve always had most conservatives on our side, and we’ve never had most liberals, but we’re starting to lose the center, folks, and that’s all she wrote, if that happens.
Chap’s notes on the withdrawal of support from South Vietnam are a good but inexact analogy, but hold the beginnings of a persuasive argument. A recent Atlantic article by Jim Fallows, “Why Iraq Has No Army,” written by a guy who has pretty consistently *opposed* the war, actually contains more coherent arguments for *staying* than I’ve seen in most of the right-wing blogosphere.
More light, less heat.
November 18th, 2005 at 9:46 am
Allow me to sharpen Barry’s cogent point with my left-wing blade:
Please continue to pile on Murtha. Please keep conflating him with Michael Moore. Call him a bed-wetting commie, a “cut-and-run-guy.” Please call your Senator and Congressman and demand that they do the same. Call up all the bookers of the 24hr news networks. Demand they get Murtha on the program with their biggest resident chickenhawk. By all means, please chain yourselves to the gates of Fox News until O’Reilly gets Murtha on and calls him a cut-and-run-guy who doesn’t have the balls to fight the war on terror. And super-mega-double bonus fantasy — get Cheney to openly proclaim the same.
The sooner we get to the definitive McCarthy/Welch moment, the better.
War footing based on lies, horrific planning, nebulous goals, utter lack of candor, and now, vicious smears, is, and always was, doomed from the outset.
There was never anyone in this Administration who had the microphone and Barry’s insight — that the potentially legitimate reasons for this war are inherently complex and nuanced, that they must be examined openly and continuously. There are plenty of us who never got the war, and thus didn’t support it. The Administration operated on the belief that they didn’t need us, that we could be marginalized, that they could polarize the country on a no-worse than 51-49 basis, maintain themselves in power, and thus continue to prosecute the war in any manner, and at any length they saw fit.
And their approach is now grinding to a halt. Whether the war is or was right or wrong is quickly becoming beside the point which the Administration unwittingly continues to make in a most nasty and ugly manner.
And that is, you can’t prosecute this kind of a war with mere platitudes and denigrations.
November 18th, 2005 at 10:27 am
[...] So I ain’t happy with Representative Murtha. Followup comments below. Everything under the “more” tag because I want the nuclear post to stay on top until someone actually reads it. [...]
November 18th, 2005 at 10:39 am
Mr. de Ville (is your wife named…? nah forget it):
re- “…..you can’t prosecute this kind of a war with mere platitudes and denigrations.” No platitudes or denigrations here. Just a statement.
We certainly can’t trust “cut and run losers” who won’t allow our our troops the Victory they deserve because of politics and a barely repressed need for payback over Clinton’s impeachment and the 2000 election. The mere idea is beyond outrageous.
You on the left will not get to re-write history..I don’t care if the left own the MSM and academia….my children and all in my sphere will hear the truth until my last breath is taken.
You see, for the most part, we the troops (even though retired I will be one till death) loathe quitters. That is boilerplate, and that is why the American military never loses a war unless politics intercedes.
B2
November 18th, 2005 at 2:01 pm
Chap -
I’m not arguing “he’s a veteran and therefore he’s right.” Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, was and continues to be dead wrong about a lot of things.
I’m saying, simply, this: Murtha is a person with enormous credibility on the Hill due to his experience and track record. And he’s being “answered” right now with ad hominem attacks and shrill nonsense instead of the facts.
I continue to support US involvement in Iraq, and I continue to believe that a close examination of the facts on the ground supports it too.
But the current strategy to counter Murtha is not a winner.
November 19th, 2005 at 2:21 pm
I concur with Mr. Campbell on this. There are conservatives and Republicans within our government, and within the national political leadership, who have been making statements criticizing the war (including some who previously supported it, and who still may), and who have called for a timetable for withdrawal… Though their statements haven’t been as bold as those of Rep. Murtha.
November 19th, 2005 at 2:46 pm
Aakash, you have a perfectly valid point. In my own personal case, though, my reaction is truly emotional, as a military man one of utter betrayal. I understand your and Barry’s points, and tried to make my own post as even in tone as I could (at least the first one) but I get more angry the longer I think about it and after I saw Murtha and his fellow congressmen on CSPAN last night.
November 21st, 2005 at 5:23 pm
[...] What I feel when I hear guys like Murtha wrapping himself in the (Marine Corps) flag and self-righteously tell us all is lost, all is wasted, bug out now, cut and run, is that thing which a fighter wants least around him. The argument itself can be separately dealt with, as I did from my comfy chair, as Major K in Iraq and Jim from Blackfive did. Others read more dishonorable motives for Murtha. Murtha is helping my enemy through ill-thought-out ideas, using his association with my profession to gain credit with his fellows. He is enough of a man to be able to withstand the slings and arrows of an outraged colonel without being reduced to a puddle. Murtha should be able to get passionate debate without his colleagues all falling over themselves to be shocked–shocked!–by the impetuousness of dissent from The Word Of Murtha. Having updated my will before spending a year attached to a seagoing vessel in preparation for Marines in Iraq, I have a little bit of emotional investment in the debate as well. The Veep can roll back the White House spokesman’s initial reaction as he desires–but Murtha’s words won’t be forgotten. [...]