Last Pearl Harbor Day I described the event from the perspective of an eight year old boy. While not comprehending the attack as the adults around me, I knew that something very profound had occurred. I must be among the youngest people in the world who have personal memories of the date that will live in infamy.
It’s nice to be among the youngest at something. While a child, I was often the youngest to do this, that or the other thing, but with a white mane comes the honor of being the oldest at most tasks or anniversaries.
This year, remembrances of Pearl Harbor will bring back many memories and much soul searching. Being extraordinarily angry with President Bush for leading us into a preventive war against Iraq, I’ve tried to analyze what he has done and evaluate it with how his predecessors acted under at least vaguely analogous circumstances.
Franklin Roosevelt under severe pressure from Isolationist Republicans – and more than a few Democrats – saw Western Civilization enter a period of extreme danger that was bound to involve the United States. He saw clearly the dangers posed by National Socialism, Soviet Communism, and Japanese Militarism, and under extreme political pressure he had to ready the nation yet not act precipitously in the face of external threat. His great leadership and political adroitness saved America, helped destroy Nazism, stopped Japanese imperialism, rescued and revived Western Civilization, and prepared the way for containing Soviet expansionism.
The attack on Pearl Harbor and Hitler’s hubris in declaring war on us permitted Roosevelt to exert his greatest powers of leadership and propelled the nation to the forefront in the world.
Truman, despite personal fieriness was ever thoughtful as president, acted in Korea after our ally had been attacked. This, the Marshall Plan, and his measured response to the encirclement of Berlin assures his place in the pantheon of presidents. He acted forcefully when it was called for and with restraint when required.
In trying to evaluate Vietnam, I believe that the slide into the morass was far less blameworthy than what has befallen us in Iraq. Eisenhower and Kennedy got caught up in the problems of France, a valued ally. Johnson, who bears the greatest burden of blame in that war, was well drawn in before realizing the full extent of the problem and the difficulties of extracting our forces with any semblance of honor. The war destroyed what might well have been one of the great presidencies. Nixon and Ford worked hard to make the best of a bad situation. Clearly, the fears of a domino like fall of nations before the communist onslaught were never realized, and our understanding of a megalithic world communism were laid to rest forever.
George H. W. Bush (Bush 41) was faced with the invasion of Kuwait by the armies of Saddam Hussein. Bush and other world leaders demanded that Saddam withdraw from Kuwait and threatened military action if he did not. Saddam refused, and Bush shined by developing a true international force supported by the vast majority of the nations of the world and the voters of this country. The allied forces triumphed in short order and restored the government of Kuwait to power. Bush 41, clearly understanding the mood of the coalition allies and the likely problems with occupying a Muslim nation, stopped his forces when the objective of restoration had been achieved.
Going back even further in American history we can see the difficulties of such presidents as Wilson and Lincoln in leading the nation into war. Wilson’s case was difficult, but he had the sinking of American vessels to fall back on in his arguments for entering the fray. Lincoln, of course, waited for the Confederacy to fire the first shots in South Carolina.
To give Bush some small cover – which is not my purpose – it is clear that presidents have acted preemptively in many cases. Our war with Mexico has never granted us much pleasure and our actions in Panama and Grenada might fool some into seeing comparisons with Iraq. But these are false. Our actions in the Western Hemisphere going back to our earliest national history when President Monroe acted to defend the New World from old world aggression deserve a special sphere of consideration.
This leads us directly to George W. Bush’s war in Iraq. There can be little doubt that Saddam posed little threat to us or our allies in the region. It is evident that the nation was led into a conflict at the head of a phony coalition under false pretenses. George Bush will never be able to worm his way out of this indictment.
His only way to redemption is to fix what he has broken. He has to patch together something akin to a government in Iraq, arm its police and security forces, provide some protection from international intrusion - especially from Iran, withdraw most all of our troops from the country, and to create – as suggested by Congressman John Murtha and others – a force that can intervene in the region if things go terribly from our interests in the region.
It’s sad, but Bush has almost no wiggle room, and we have little choice to support him.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
