Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2007 | 7:01 a.m.
In the early 1970s, the U.S. military was actively involved in a Southeast Asian country's "civil war": Vietnam-McNamara's war. Then-President Richard Nixon was desperately seeking to salvage something politically palatable in the face of an "unwinnable war" and a politically unacceptable situation. (Sound familiar?)
The objective had changed from "winning the war" to "winning the peace." Then-Sen. George Aiken from Vermont, in a 12-minute speech, proposed a simple solution. Declare a brilliant victory and get out (Vietnamization). Many moons, lives, maimings and political rhetorical sound bites later, that's exactly what the administration did.
What are the odds that, once again, the U.S. administration will ultimately heed the late Sen. Aiken's advice with regard to the U.S. military's involvement in a Middle Eastern country's "civil war": Iraq-Rumsfeld's war?
The objective has apparently changed from establishing a beacon of Western-style democracy in the Middle East to propping up a government (any government) whose tape will not self-destruct in five seconds should it decide to accept the mission. Put the numbers on the board!
Mark Bennett, Las Vegas
archive
