iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Will Bunch

Will Bunch

Posted: July 6, 2009 10:55 AM

Robert McNamara and America's Tragic Memory Loss


Robert McNamara died today at age 93. As Secretary of Defense for Presidents John F. Kennedy and more notably Lyndon Johnson in the mid-1960s, it was McNamara who oversaw America's tragic military buildup in Vietnam. That made McNamara -- right up until today's news -- a vivid anti-icon to those Baby Boomers who opposed the war -- and I think you can make the case that his death is that of the most historical significance of the slew of recent "celebrity" passings, no matter how many millions of people are gathering outside the Staples Center to remember the Gloved One.

Bob McNamara was not a great man. He was a man with great intelligence that didn't prevent him from executing a plan that led to the unnecessary slaughter -- for reasons that remain hard to fully comprehend -- of tens of thousands of Americans and many more Vietnamese. He spent next four decades trying to come to terms with the banality of evil, with the horror of what he and those around him had done, but even his unusually candid apologies never seemed to go far enough:

The secretary of defense was a key figure in decisions to escalate the war between 1961 and 1965, and he readily concedes that the assumptions upon which he and his colleagues acted were badly flawed. They approached Vietnam, he recalls, with "sparse knowledge, scant experience and simplistic assumptions." Victims of their own "innocence and confidence," they foolishly viewed communism as monolithic, knew nothing about Indochina, and were "simple-minded" regarding the historical relationship between China and Vietnam. They badly misjudged Ho Chi Minh's nationalism and consistently overestimated South Vietnam's ability to survive. Regarding the key decisions of 1965, he admits he should have anticipated that bombing North Vietnam would lead to requests for ground troops. He concedes there should have been a public debate on the July 1965 decision for war. Over and over he acknowledges that he should have examined the unexamined assumptions, asked the unasked questions, and explored the readily dismissed alternatives.

The life of Robert McNamara was a personal tragedy, but it was also an American tragedy, our tragedy -- because even after McNamara spelled out everything that went so horribly wrong in Vietnam, he lived long enough to see a new generation of the self-appointed "best and brightest" in Washington pay absolutely no mind to the lessons of our recent past.

In Iraq, as in Vietnam, our policy-makers knew nothing or cared little about the long history and convoluted ethnic and religious politics of Mesopotamia's Fertile Crescent. In Iraq, as in Vietnam, there was no plan for the proper military follow-up to a period of "shock and awe" bombing. In Iraq, as in Vietnam, we totally misjudged the "nationalism" of the people who lived there and how they would react to a long American occupation. And perhaps most importantly, In Iraq, as in Vietnam, there was no real "public debate" as we marched headlong and foolishly into 2003 -- with way too many "unexamined assumptions," "unasked questions," and "readily dismissed alternatives."

I actually spoke, very briefly, on the phone with McNamara in early 2003 in an effort to interview him for the Philadelphia Daily News, where I am a reporter. Like a few other journalists in that critical hour, I was hoping some of his tragically acquired wisdom might infuse the tepid pre-war discussions, and like all other reporters in those pre-war months, he told me he was holding off on commenting (as noted in the link above, he had a lot to say in 2006...when it was too late). That was a damned shame -- even though I can't imagine it would have tipped the rigged scales.

Regardless of your religious or spiritual beliefs, it's hard not to imagine there wasn't some higher purpose to McNamara's longevity. You could argue that it was a cosmic punishment, of sorts, to live so many years with the searing memories of so many who died so horrifically because of his misguided decisions from the comforts of his big desk at the Pentagon. Or you argue that he was still here in the early 2000s as a kind of a warped prophet, a flesh-and-blood monument to the folly of militarism. If that is true, then the fact that America refused to pay any attention is Robert McNamara's greatest tragedy of all.

Follow Will Bunch on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Will_Bunch

 
 
  • Comments
  • 96
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
11:16 PM on 07/12/2009
There's a reason why 'the best and brightest' have continued to make the same mistakes.

Because it makes moolah for the people who profit from war.

Back then it was Bell Helicopters, General Dynamics, etc

This time around Haliburton

And the kicker is that it's partly our fault. When public pressure led them to repeal the draft, we took that crumb as a sign we were headed in a better direction, when actually what they were saying is "We will still have wars for profit, you just don't have to go if you don't want to"

Lame. Wars will keep happening as long as there's money to be made. The major lesson we have to learn from the last forty years is that what the corporations want the corporations get. Wars, a nation of fat, lazy people, stuffing their faces with crap food, people running up massive debt just to buy junk, an education system so broken no one realizes they're being exploited, etc etc, all of it is what big business wanted.

They are Enemies of the People
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Skepticat
Supporting skeptical felines everywhere
10:56 PM on 07/12/2009
McNamara was a classic example of the folly of group think. Collecting the "best and the brightest" provided they all think exactly the same way was what caused the mess because of their faulty analysis and refusal to examine evidence or views to the contrary. The PNAC ideologues who created the Iraq invasion suffered from the same problem. Barbara Tuchman explored the concept in "the March of Folly". Back in 1940 Conservative columnist Walter Lippmann wrote, "When everyone is thinking the same - no one is thinking very much.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slowtono
09:53 PM on 07/12/2009
Because the government refused to give power of actual war to the soldier in Viet Nam was one of several reasons we failed. Mc Namarra was just there to insure we didn't kick ass and demand government/social gratuity as did the returning vets of WWII who demanded government to improve living conditions and livelihoods.
08:13 PM on 07/12/2009
Vietnam and Iraq are and were both about money most of all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nomccain
04:11 PM on 07/12/2009
Well, to me "brilliant" means NOTHING! I have a son whose IQ is 165 but he doesn't have an ounce of common sense. Perhaps its time we hired common educated people to run our nation's various departments. The results couldn't be any worse than gifted people like Rumsfield and McNamara and others have done. Vietnam SHOULD have taught us a lot but in retrospect, it apparently didn't teach us anything. However, just remember that this country is being run by the interests of corporate America and the military industrial complex (Pentagon) and war is good business for them and their interests. Not so for the rest of us. Washington D.C. needs to clean the rats out of town and start over with some people with integrity and patriotism and COMMON SENSE.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jules23
07:55 PM on 07/12/2009
Bush is ordinary, and I think this is why a lot of people voted for him. He then ended up surrounding himself with the "best and brightest" to counteract his lack of experience. We don't need ordinary people to run the country, we want extraordinary people with a capacity to understand their own limitations and a desire to understand the world around them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slowtono
09:48 PM on 07/12/2009
No Bush like the present administration was connected and tapped by the party. It's a game of chess maneuvering and manipulating. Thats why Bush seniors personnel were all about why Bush Jr. was president just as Clintons cronies are all around now in Obama's administration. Since the end of Regan the same people have been running the show. It's really a time for average new comers.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:56 PM on 07/12/2009
"Many more" is 55,000/3,200,000; it's our modern method of human sacrifice. 700 dead Pakistanis to 60 dead "terrorists" means our god can kick their god's a$$.

Historical amnesia plagues us. How? The mythology!

Antebellum Iraq, many whine that it's not American to invade on false pretenses. HA! Ask any of the tribes that we didn't manage to wipe out as a matter of public policy during the era of Manifest Destiny.

Or Chileans under our dictator Pinochet, Iraqis today, etc.

"The War Prayer" was a vivid commentary [by Mark Twain] on the misappropriation of religion on behalf of nationalistic causes. It begins with a church service in which the pastor calls down the blessings of God upon American military forces and concludes with, "Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!"

A frail old man makes his way into the church and, waving the pastor aside, explains that he has spoken with God Himself, who wishes to hear the other half of that prayer — the half that was only in their hearts and uttered but implicitly.
http://mises.org/story/2408

Journalists and bloggers bust malignant myths (America's Innocence and Exceptionalism, our mythical right to rule the world http://www.newstatesman.com/north-america/2009/07/pilger-obama-america-world ); propagandists deploy them.

What's a myth?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/the-myth-of-how-the-media_b_226136.html?show_comment_id=26664325#comment_26664325
03:22 PM on 07/12/2009
so...
Are you saying that Ho Chi Minh was a sweet heart?
How about Saddam Hussein?
Would you put these two "leaders" in the same class as JFK?
How about Fidel Castro?
Should we lose a lot of sleep over how he's been treated over the years?
What do you think he did to the Cubans who helped us out in the Bay of Pigs disaster? Who cries for them?

Oh yeah, how about all of those hundreds of thousands of people who fled in open boats trying to GET AWAY from the North Vietnamese? Remember, these were Vietnamese as well. Vietnamese who were running for their very lives from the same people YOU apologize for.
researcher
researcher
03:41 PM on 07/12/2009
you know so little about this war so little

I noticed you did not mention the viet cong

I suspect you do not even know who the viet cong were

tragic war and we did not learn from it

the iraqis dance in the streets as we leave their cities and one trillion spent

we are hated in the world for our imperialism and you defend our imperialism

oh we have so much to learn in america so much

self righteousness we are to a fault
06:47 PM on 07/12/2009
since you know so much about the Viet Nam war why don't you tell us all what happened to the Viet Cong once the North took over?
Or don't you know?

while your at it, why don't you look up the definition of the word "imperialism."

And once again, you fail to address ANY of my questions...
What a surprise.
09:31 PM on 07/12/2009
"What do you think he did to the Cubans who helped us out in the Bay of Pigs disaster? Who cries for them?"

Actually, many of them were simply held for a period of time and then released. Just ask Gloria Estefan's father.
10:28 PM on 07/12/2009
Oh I see, I've been dealing Castro an unfair hand all of these years.
What was I thinking?
02:27 PM on 07/12/2009
I too was regarded as cannon fodder by McNamara. As much as I hated the draft, it at least made the army a more representative group of the public at large than today's all volunteer army. The national collective amnesia of the damage caused by this misadventure needs to be remembered.
photo
humanbeing-rick
Born in the USA 1947
02:08 PM on 07/12/2009
I agree with Will Bunch, Mr. McNamara's was the architect of the Vietnam war that destroyed my generation. Most of the "best and brightest" of my generation were either killed, maimed, or mentally damaged from the Vietnam war. We could have been a great generation. We were supposed to bring in the "Age of Aquarius". Well that sure fell apart. didnt it?
03:37 PM on 07/12/2009
Unfortunately YOUR generation is in charge now.
In charge at every level of our society from Wall Street to schools to public works projects...
And look at the mess we are in.
I blame your generation for everything. Our lackadaisical attitude towards drugs, sex and the almost total destruction of the nuclear family.
Your generation has totally screwed up everything we ever valued.
When will you answer for that?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jules23
08:03 PM on 07/12/2009
If you think our biggest problems are the destruction of the nuclear family, and a lax attitude towards drugs, then I'm afraid you are the problem! Fighting for a 1950s ideal that never actually existed, versus solving things like climate change and global poverty is exactly the kind of bone headed thinking that has prevented us from making any significant progress on any of these issues.
08:09 PM on 07/12/2009
As a boomer, I am qualified to answer this with the humble apology other generations deserve from the boomers. We DID screw everything up... our legacy of greed and destruction is absolutely shameful. I don't know what happened to us... In my opinion, our hippie phase was great -- we were showing great energy and creativity... Then we all graduated and thud. Myself included. I am like McNamara in that there is no apology deep enough, no amount of shame or regret can fix what we did/didn't do. I don't know how to answer for that.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
MikeDu
Both salubrious and lugubrious concurrently.
10:40 AM on 07/12/2009
Its not that the "best and the brightest" forget, its that they actively discarded the memory of Vietnam. I remember following Gulf War I the glee with which they announced that they were no longer under the historical cloud of Vietnam. I knew then that another Vietnam was on the horizon. I didn't know where, I didn't know when, but it was inevitable.

The irony was the Vietnam analogy was discarded because Gulf War I had been so 'easy'. But some years later the Lancette published their finding that Gulf War Syndrome was dues to trace nerve agents. In effect, the Gulf War allied casualties went from the hundreds to the hundreds of thousands.
10:52 AM on 07/12/2009
"""""no longer under the historical cloud of viet nam"""""

they lost in viet nam ------they won in gulf 1

they thought then had shed the image the american forces could not win a war--didnt last too long
10:25 AM on 07/12/2009
I don't remember the exact year,but I remember seeing McNamara sitting with his family on the deck of a place called Grettle's in Aspen Colorado.There he was seemingly as unconcerned as the rest of us,enjoying the skiing and beauty of my favorite ski resort.
I also vividly remember asking myself what would happen if I went up to him and called him a murderous S.O.B.and spit in his face.
Well I didn't do it !Not because I was afraid of being arrested,or it would ruin my ski trip,but because I thought I might start a riot and disrupt the lives of the numerous people there who were innocent bystanders.
All I can say is,it's a good thing I was never was in close proximity to any other architects of the Viet Nam Tragedy during those years,because I don't think my temper could tollerate it!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
buttonz
05:14 AM on 07/12/2009
During my military service I remember officers preaching to marines that we still need infantry to fight our battles. This was 2002. After the first Gulf War, Kosovo, and Rumsfeld we believed that using actual soldiers and armor was a thing of the past and thought that air power was the new form of warfare. Then there was Iraq, and we had to learn everything over again. In the mean time Army and Marine generals protested the politicians and their naive perspective of warfare. Luckily the Bush admin came to its senses in the last few years. It isn't the military that loses our wars, it is the politicians
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:31 AM on 07/12/2009
Yes, very short memories in America. Not to mention the still evident problem of hypocrisy
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Texas Aggie
01:29 PM on 07/07/2009
There is a major difference between the reasons for Viet Nam and Iraq that relate to their initiation. The difference is that Iraq was originally designed by Cheney's oil buddies to get control of one of the last sources of easily obtained petroleum left on earth. There was a major economic motive behind it. Viet Nam, on the other hand, was more political and the people pushing for it were not necessarily motivated solely for their own economic gain. This may be less true among the military/ industrial complex, but, by and large, there were mostly political underpinnings for VietNam and economic underpinnings for Iraq.
photo
othel
I believe I don't believe
06:53 PM on 07/07/2009
Vietnam was a war of draftees. Young men going there had one thought in mind and one only: getting back home alive.
Iraq is a war of conflicted volunteerism.
02:07 PM on 07/09/2009
Look please spare us these "we invaded Iraq because of oil" arguments. They are so stale and quite honestly, false.

The reasons Bush went to war in Iraq are:

(1) He needed an easy identifiable scapegoat to deflect from his "He can run but he cannot hide" inability to track down Bin Laden. Hence the paranoid attempts to create a non-existant link between Saddam Hussain and Al Qaeda.

(2) He was advised that a "quick easy war" would ensure massive popularity and ensure his reelection in 2004. (Example: Maggie Thatcher and the Falklands war in UK politics)

(3) Daddy told him he regretted not taking out Sadam Hussain when he had the chance. So he decided he had to finish Daddy's business for him.


Oil? It was a welcome by product. As proof look how much we have benefited (not!) from Iraqi oil since the invasion!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoeSchmuk
03:47 AM on 07/12/2009
You really think so? Dont be naive. 'We' is where you get mixed up in your rationale. Follow the money. Bush, Cheney et al are at the head of the line in both Saudi Arabia, and now Iraq. Two of the largest oil deposits in the world Today. Now! And for years to come. You think that is just coincidence? The American and Iraqi people are just a decimal part of the equation, part of the plutocratic imperative. Everything else is just dressing as far as those boys are concerned.

The US people have been had, and the middle east is being ransacked by a bunch of redneck dough boys from the east coast while the rest of the world quibbles about democracy, enhanced interrogations, and bogus WMDs etc.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artos
Down with Tyrants
12:42 PM on 07/07/2009
I can pretty well guarantee that this thing in Afghanistan is just beginning to shape up into a new adventure in war. We are committing even more troops now to it, something that should have happened in 2002 but was deferred so that Bush and Cheney could start their pet project. So I would say we will be in Afghanistan for at least another 3 to 5 years until we get some sense an leave our of frustration. My guarantee is that even should Afghanistan end within another three years that Americans will most assuredly find another stupid war to get into in ten years time. We just can't seem to keep our noses out of imbecilic interventions. Our Corporations dictate our needs and National Interests and when it is in their interests to meddle where they aren't welcome then they get us involved in wars and call it Patriotic. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.