In2TheFray ? Let’s Jump…Comment Inspired Posting
Got this comment in the thread of this post.
The US’ legacy of foreign intervention and misrepresentation as to how/why it has become embroiled in these interventions is lengthy (the sinking of the Maine in the Spanish-American war, the sinking of the Lusitania in WWI, the Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam, Iraq I post Kirkpatrick’s meeting with Saddam’s underlings and Iraq II post the WMD inspections; all of these are clear cases where the US administration manipulated the truth in order to cajole the US public into war). As Thucydides said “Great Nations do what they want, Lesser Nations accept what they must” – the only difference in that modern “democratic” Great Nations wars must be sold to the masses.(BDE)
Not in order for a reason- let’s jump in2thefray…
The sinking of the Lusitania was not misrepresented in the US and was not a key issue for getting the Yanks to go Over There ! There is a clear case to say the Brits misrepresented the Lusitania. The US tact was using it and other incidents as cases of German unrestricted U boat operations. Such is life when one tries to walk the line of neutrality when on one side there are those you like and on another ones yo don’t. The Zimmermann note more inflammatory than Lusitania ? Mmmm. Maybe. Ultimately Wilson’s progressive new world order dreams were the cause of US involvement entering Europes little inbred squabble.
Gulf of Tonkin. Looks good on a page of paper and as a talking point but, the truth seeps in. The Vietnam War was a long and ongoing conflict that was all about the concerns of communisms spread. Imperialism countering and guilty ? Perhaps but the Tonkin was not as big as many would want you to believe. Seems funny and scary to say that given the fact the Iran Revvie Guard wants to buzz the USN in another Gulf.
Iraq I: not about oil and not just a USA thing. Iraq II. Not about the oil and this then meshes well with the USS Maine part of the comment. The Maines sinking was a great example of yellow journalism. Wag the dog,jingoism or whatever you want to call it. The sinking of the Maine was clearly a call to arms. Much like Remember the Alamo the catch phrase was perfect. It was the packaging of the policy though as opposed to the policy, perhaps better said the gravy not the meat. The Spanish were quick to respond to the Maine. They pursued a reasoned investigation,offered profuse apologies and were in hindsight guiltless for it’s destruction. They were not guiltless of the real reason the US went to war with them. They were an unpopular presence in our backyard and the oppressive regime with their foot on the necks of Filipinos. The latter meant they were imposing on our best coal supplying option in the Pacific crucial for our Far East trade routes. It is for these reasons that the US jumped into the pool of international imperialism.
So in closing Iraq II. Saddam was the pain in our ass. He was guilty of internationally recognized crimes. He too tried to work a deal to avoid conflict. The truth is though no matter the rallying cries of the Right or Left there is truths in why the US has engaged in combat. No matter if one believes it or not.
BDE we will definitely have to agree to disagree. Thanks for stopping by. I have a post coming next week on the Patriot Act that may drive you to comment.
I2TF;
If you don’t think that the NYT info backs up my assertion that Kirkpatrick gave Saddam a green light we will have to agree to disagree. To me it seems plain that Kirkpatrick was telling Saddam the US would not interfere in Arab on Arab conflicts. If anybody is lying it was Kirkpatrick!
Re: Tonkin, the US fired first and the second attack never happened. All the information on this incident is now in the public domain.
I love the US. Great place to live or visit (well it was until post 9-11 and the draconian “Patriot” Act) and a country that allows individuals to prosper from their own labor.
Patriotism, however, is the last refuge of a scoundrel (Samuel Johnson)
I2TF
Re: Tonkin, as I said read up the declassified stuff.
from wikipedia;
[edit] First attack
On 2 August the Maddox claimed it was attacked by three North Vietnamese P-4 patrol torpedo boats 28 miles (45 km) away from the North Vietnamese coast in international waters.[9] The Maddox claimed to have evaded a torpedo attack and opened fire with its five-inch (127 mm) guns, forcing the patrol craft away. U.S. aircraft launched from Ticonderoga then attacked the retiring P-4s, claiming one as sunk and one heavily damaged. In fact, none of the three vessels was sunk.[citation needed] The Maddox, suffering very minor damage from a single 14.5-millimeter machine gun bullet, retired to South Vietnamese waters where she was joined by the destroyer Turner Joy.
However, this account has come into sharp dispute with an official 2005 NSA declassified report[10] which stated:
“At 1500G, Captain Herrick ordered Ogier’s gun crews to open fire if the boats approached within ten thousand yards. At about 1505G, the Maddox fired three rounds to warn off the communist boats. This initial action was never reported by the Johnson administration, which insisted that the Vietnamese boats fired first.” [2] Page 17
If this new account is accurate, the U.S. fired the first shots in the Gulf of Tonkin. As the 2007 book Legacy of Ashes puts it:
It was not an honest mistake. The war in Vietnam began with political lies based on fake intelligence. Had the CIA been working as its charter intended, if McCone had fulfilled his duties under law as he saw them, the false reports might not have survived for more than a few hours. But the full truth did not come out until November 2005, in a highly detailed confession released by the National Security Agency. … The United States stepped up commando raids at sea … To bolster his forces, Washington increased surveillance on the North … eavesdropping on encoded enemy communication … SIGINT … inside a black box … lashed to the deck of a destroyer ..[with] attennas and monitors operated by at least a dozen officers of the Naval Security Group… data they collected was decrypted and translated by NSA. … Shortly after 3 p.m. [on Aug 2], the Maddox fired three times at the North Vietnamese patrol boats. The shots were never reported or acknowledged by the Pentagon or the White House; they maintained the communists shot first. The Maddox was still firing when four navy F-8E jets blasted the patrol boats, killing four sailors …. On Aug 3 [Washington] proclaimed … patrols would continue in the Gulf of Tonkin, and the State Department announced it had sent its first-ever diplomatic note to Hanoi, warning of “grave consequences” of “further unprovoked military action.” At that hour, another provocative OPLAN 34A mission was dispatched to sabotage a radar station … on island of Hon Matt. Then on … August 4, the American commanders … received urgent alert from onshore SIGINT operators: the three North Vietnamese patrol boats encountered off Hon Me Island on August 2 were returning … McNamara called the President … at 10 p.m. … 10 a.m. in Washington …American destroyers sent flash message they were under attack … operators aboard Maddox and Turner Joy reported seeing ghostly blotches in the night. Their captains opened fire. The NSA report … described how “these two destroyers gyrated wildly in the dark waters of the Gulf of Tonkin, the Turner Joy firing over 300 rounds wildly,” both ships taking furious evasive maneuvers. “It was this high-speed gyrating by the American warships through the waters that created all the additional sonar reports of more torpedoes.” They had been firing at their own shadows. The president immediately ordered an air strike … to begin that night. Within an HOUR, Captain Herrick reported: “ENTIRE ACTION LEAVES MANY DOUBTS.” Ninety minutes later these doubts vanished in Washington. The NSA told the secretary of defense and the president of the United States that it had intercepted a North Vietnamese naval communique reading: “SACRIFICED TWO SHIPS AND ALL THE REST ARE OKAY.” But after the American air strikes against North Vietnam had begun, the NSA reviewed the day’s communications intercepts. There was nothing. Every SIGNIT eavesdropper in South Vietnam and the Philippines looked again. Nothing. The NSA reexamined the intercept it had handed to the president, double-checking the translation and the time stamp on the original message. Upon review, the message actually read: “WE SACRIFICED TWO COMRADES BUT ALL ARE BRAVE.” The message had been composed either immediately before or at the moment when the Maddox and the Turner Joy opened fire on August 4. It was not about what had happened that night. It was about the first clash, two nights earlier, on August 2. The NSA buried this salient fact. It told no one. Its analysts and linguists looked a third time, and a fourth time, at the time stamp. Everyone — everyone, even the doubters — decided to stay silent. [11]
THATS RIGHT, THE US FIRED FIRST!
As pertains to the first attack which I’ve taken the non patriotic truth position on. NOT the “second”. The conflict was not substantially escalated due to “lies” You won’t can’t see that and apply it to your displeasure on the Vietnam policy in total.
I2TF,
All I do is evaluate US foreign policy without the benefit of the rosy tint of patriotism.
I’m patriotic but more than willing to point out the negatives of American policy. I have many thoughts on our LAtin America policies of the past and contrast them with the true and better “Good Neighbor” actions such as USNS Comfort and USNS Mercy making goodwill medical tours of the region. There’s more and you are welcome to come and see that and add to the full discussion. My glasses of patriotism are often only a counter to the lenses of others that focus on questionable/false minutiae.
Tyrone,
USS Liberty … don’t even go there.
All the evidence points to a deliberate attack by Israel and a cover up.
Can’t deal with the fact that the US behaves as any other nation (ie amorally)? Too bad.
FWIW I’m not to happy impressed by the Liberty episode. There are some issues there me thinks.
I2TF
Calm down. I suggested you read some more and you call me an a hole.
Kirkpatrick gave the green light to Saddam to invade Kuwait. He figured the US owed him after the Iran-Iraq war.
That’s a lie misrepresentation on you at worse a false application of logic at best. from the NYT
It is not my fault I am better educated than you on these issues.You are not better educated. You are well researched on information (portions) that serve your position.You are right though. I got my anger and disdain up
Fray,
Dont get him started on the USS Liberty.
Lusitania still not the super cause you alluded too.138 +/- Americans killed.US don’t go till 1917. After much more Uboat attacks.
Tonkin….Should I read up history or just things you want me to read ? Of two attacks the first one is universally accepted as factual and enen the Vietnamese concede it happened and was a hostile action. The second occurrence seems to the one you get your hackles up on.The first was enough wasn’t it ? It also led only to an almost inevitable escalation.
The Spain,Maine Iraq triangle is an excellent group of points.Filipinos being oppressed by the Spaniards then rebelling against the “rescuing” Americans in insurgent fashion. Very Iraq. I think I made my point pretty clearly earlier on the issue.
Yep you’re right btw. I was at the meeting when George Sr. told Saddam to invade Kuwait. But let me be less an a hole than you with your constant “read up” snark. You most likely mean the Iran/Iraq war. The results thereof which had Saddam having and using the chem weaps on his own population. At what point do you think the US told SH to gas his population ?
You seem committed to embracing those things many declare huge red letter incidents. The truth is within these incidents the actions and intent go beyond the conspiracy theory.
I2TF
You do realize that in regards to the Lusitania, the US PULLED ads that the German Gov’t placed in US papers re the Lusitania.
From Wikipedia;
“The Imperial German embassy placed this warning ad in 50 East Coast newspapers, including those in New York. This ad was prepaid and requested to be put on the paper’s travel page a full week before the sailing date. However, even though the ads were sent to newspapers in time for the requested deadline, the State Department of the United States intervened by raising the specter of possible libel suits. The ads, intended by the German government to save American lives, were to appear in only one newspaper, the Des Moines Register. It has been argued (without any historical evidence) the actions taken by the U.S. government were taken to ensure the U.S. would become embroiled in WWI as the killing of innocent women and children by Germany would stir popular opinion against the Central Powers.[7]”
If you do more homework you will find that there is considerable (now declassified) evidence indicating that the US gov’t deliberately chose to do this as a means to whip up anti-German, pro-war sentiments amongst the US population. Using the old maxim “Cui bono”, one must admit that the decision to pull the ads seems quite reasonable given that US elites wanted the US to enter the war but the mass of US citizens did not.
Re Gulf of Tonkin; a clear case of the US lying about events and a clearly an attempt by the US gov’t to increase domestic support for a foreign intervention that was unpopular at home. I think I@TF needs to read up more on this incident as much has now been declassified.
Re: The Maine; “They [The Spanish] were not guiltless of the real reason the US went to war with them. They were an unpopular presence in our backyard and the oppressive regime with their foot on the necks of Filipinos” – I2TF you should read up on the “enlightened” US administration of the Phillipines in the early 2oth century – makes the Spanish look almost decent.
Saddam was guilty of crimes committed in the 80s when the US encouraged him to undertake these acts; and then the US uses these crimes to justify attacking Saddam?!
Bold mine :ed