What Fresh Hell Is This?

November 21, 2006

Olbermann's Comment last night

In case you missed it, here it is.
It is a shame and it is embarrassing to us all when President Bush travels 8,000 miles only to wind up avoiding reality again.

And it is pathetic to listen to a man talk unrealistically about Vietnam, who permitted the “Swift-Boating” of not one but two American heroes of that war, in consecutive presidential campaigns.

But most importantly — important beyond measure — his avoidance of reality is going to wind up killing more Americans.

And that is indefensible and fatal.

Asked if there were lessons about Iraq to be found in our experience in Vietnam, Mr. Bush said that there were, and he immediately proved he had no clue what they were.

“One lesson is,” he said, “that we tend to want there to be instant success in the world, and the task in Iraq is going to take a while.”

“We’ll succeed,” the president concluded, “unless we quit.”

If that’s the lesson about Iraq that Mr. Bush sees in Vietnam, then he needs a tutor.

Or we need somebody else making the decisions about Iraq.

Mr. Bush, there are a dozen central, essential lessons to be derived from our nightmare in Vietnam, but “we’ll succeed unless we quit,” is not one of them.

The primary one — which should be as obvious to you as the latest opinion poll showing that only 31 percent of this country agrees with your tragic Iraq policy — is that if you try to pursue a war for which the nation has lost its stomach, you and it are finished. Ask Lyndon Johnson.

The second most important lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush: If you don’t have a stable local government to work with, you can keep sending in Americans until hell freezes over and it will not matter. Ask Vietnamese Presidents Diem or Thieu.

The third vital lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush: Don’t pretend it’s something it’s not. For decades we were warned that if we didn’t stop “communist aggression” in Vietnam, communist agitators would infiltrate and devour the small nations of the world, and make their insidious way, stealthily, to our doorstep.

The war machine of 1968 had this “domino theory.”

Your war machine of 2006 has this nonsense about Iraq as “the central front in the war on terror.”

The fourth pivotal lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush: If the same idiots who told Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon to stay there for the sake of “peace With honor” are now telling you to stay in Iraq, they’re probably just as wrong now, as they were then ... Dr. Kissinger.

And the fifth crucial lesson of Vietnam, Mr. Bush — which somebody should’ve told you about long before you plunged this country into Iraq — is that if you lie your country into a war, your war, your presidency will be consigned to the scrap heap of history.

Consider your fellow Texan, sir.

After Kennedy’s assassination, Lyndon Johnson held the country together after a national tragedy, not unlike you did. He had lofty goals and tried to reshape society for the better. And he is remembered for Vietnam, and for the lies he and his government told to get us there and keep us there, and for the Americans who needlessly died there.

As you will be remembered for Iraq, and for the lies you and your government told to get us there and keep us there, and for the Americans who have needlessly died there and who will needlessly die there tomorrow.

This president has his fictitious Iraqi WMD, and his lies — disguised as subtle hints — linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11, and his reason-of-the-week for keeping us there when all the evidence for at least three years has told us we need to get as many of our kids out as quickly as possible.

That president had his fictitious attacks on Navy ships in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, and the next thing any of us knew, the Senate had voted 88-2 to approve the blank check with which Lyndon Johnson paid for our trip into hell.

And yet President Bush just saw the grim reminders of that trip into hell: the 58,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese killed; the 10,000 civilians who’ve been blown up by landmines since we pulled out; the genocide in the neighboring country of Cambodia, which we triggered.

Yet these parallels — and these lessons — eluded President Bush entirely.

And, in particular, the one over-arching lesson about Iraq that should’ve been written everywhere he looked in Vietnam went unseen.

“We’ll succeed unless we quit”?

Mr. Bush, we did quit in Vietnam!

A decade later than we should have, 58,000 dead later than we should have, but we finally came to our senses.

The stable, burgeoning, vivid country you just saw there, is there because we finally had the good sense to declare victory and get out!

The domino theory was nonsense, sir.

Our departure from Vietnam emboldened no one.

Communism did not spread like a contagion around the world.

And most importantly — as President Reagan’s assistant secretary of state, Lawrence Korb, said on this newscast Friday — we were only in a position to win the Cold War because we quit in Vietnam.

We went home. And instead it was the Russians who learned nothing from Vietnam, and who repeated every one of our mistakes when they went into Afghanistan. And alienated their own people, and killed their own children, and bankrupted their own economy and allowed us to win the Cold War.

We awakened so late, but we did awaken.

Finally, in Vietnam, we learned the lesson. We stopped endlessly squandering lives and treasure and the focus of a nation on an impossible and irrelevant dream, but you are still doing exactly that, tonight, in Iraq.

And these lessons from Vietnam, Mr. Bush, these priceless, transparent lessons, writ large as if across the very sky, are still a mystery to you.

“We’ll succeed unless we quit.”

No, sir.

We will succeed against terrorism, for our country’s needs, toward binding up the nation’s wounds when you quit, quit the monumental lie that is our presence in Iraq.

And in the interim, Mr. Bush, an American kid will be killed there, probably tonight or tomorrow.

And here, sir, endeth the lesson.
'Nuff said.


Sherry P said...

just masterful.

Z said...

I agree Sherry. When I read what W said I was really confused...was he saying we learned we would have succeeded had we not quit??? And what right did HE, of all people, have to say that? Idiot. But do people freak on HIM when he basically says we didn't do enough to win an unwinnable war? That MORE American teenagers needed to be sacrificed in order to flash the "V" for Victory sign? Undoubtedly. And undoubtedly he doesn't have a clue. Not a single, bloody clue.

John Shitrock said...

When I read what W said I was really confused.

That's OK, Z. So was he.

Anonymous said...

Olberman makes his money by demeaning others. Most of his 'facts' are false. And seeing as how Mr.Olberman cannot stand on his own, other than for amusement purposes, I think posting an Olberman blog is a waste of screen space. So, if you take this blog seriously, you ought to at least be honest and start your comments with "I hate Bush" and go from there.

Schmuck Shitrock said...


Anon, hating people is really more of a thing that your side does. Liberals might hate Bush's policies; we might hate the way he is ruining the economy for the middle class and our posterity; we might hate the way the he is sqandering what Clinton built into the most powerful military in the history of the world; we might hate the way he stole both elections. But hate Bush himself? Nah, he's just a poor, dumb schlub who follows the orders of his masters. Liberals just really don't hate people.

Er, well, OK, Dick Cheney, maybe we hate Dick Cheney (:^)}.

Incidentally, you claim that most of Olbermann's facts are false. Could you give us just one small example? Just one? Remember now, it has to be a fact, not an opinion.

Oh, and you spelled his name wrong.

Can't wait to hear from you. Hope you have had a mahvelous Thanksgiving.

Anonymous said...

Now this is getting funny. Remember, Olberman has a book listing 202 people harmful to America. Not a murderer, rapist or arsonist in there, just conservatives. Mr. Olberman is certainly afraid of ideas.
So let's see, "linking Saddam to 9/11..." Nope, the Bush admin has never linked that. Only in the minds of liberals has this occurred.
"10,000 civilians who've been blown up by landmines..." My what a convenient number, all round and even.
Which proves the point, Olberman just takes something that looks like a fact and uses it as if it were. 10,000 sure is nice and neat, wonder why the numbers in real life never work out that way?
Oh well, Olberman isn't bothered by gangmembers or La Raza, just conservatives with ideas.
You on of those people or are you just a Spelling Nazi? The blog wants to know.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

Olbermann's book is tongue-in-cheek. You clearly haven't read it. On the other hand, Bernie Goldberg's book, "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America," is quite serious. You don't seem to complain about him omitting murderers and rapists...and conservatives.

So let's see, "linking Saddam to 9/11..." Nope, the Bush admin has never linked that.

Sorry, Anon, wrong again.

And let me make sure I understand you: You are complaining about the fact that Olbermann understated landmine casualties in Vietnam?

Me a spelling Nazi? No. Once again, I just respect people's names.

Anonymous said...

Olberman talked about Vietnam. Lol, he avoided the draft and threw rocks at the National Guard. And like a true liberal he now thinks he is a military genius. Liberals are so typical.
So when you correct someone's spelling I bet it makes you feel superior, sort of like Himmler or Goering. Come on, you're a liberal like Olberman, you can admit it.
As I mentioned, this blog would have credibility if you left wing kooks would just start with the phrase that you hate Bush or Bush sucks and go from there.
Remember when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Carter cancelled the Olympic games. That is how a liberal responds to a threat.
Other than that, see yah left wing kooks. Remember, Olberman never had a day of military service and yet criticizes a President who served in the National Guard. Must be left wing jealousy.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

So then we're agreed that you were unable to find any "false facts?"