To neutralize the chickenhawks in Congress who are pushing for ill-advised military actions in Libya without any knowledge of the military realities of those actions, President Obama should take a lesson from President Eisenhower in 1954. Eisenhower was undeniably the foremost military man in the world, and he was being pushed by the chickenhawks to send U.S. troops to Vietnam to relieve the French garrison at Dien Bien Phu, where the French occupiers were being booted out after 94 years of colonial rule.
Knowing that the jungles of Vietnam would “swallow up our divisions,” Eisenhower said that he would send U.S. troops to Vietnam to relieve Dien Bien Phu, but only if we had the concurrence of our allies, and a joint resolution of both houses of Congress.
The chickenhawks in Congress were great noisemakers, but at showdown time they were completely unwilling to vote to send troops to Vietnam. And our allies were wise enough to realize that a U.S. quagmire would be no better than the French quagmire. History took its course and the French troops were defeated at Dien Bien Phu and the U.S. postponed a bad decision for another nine years. The decision not to intervene in Vietnam in 1954 was the right one, and the decision to go to Vietnam in 1963 does not look any smarter now than it did then.
Neil Thex
Dale Whiting posted at 7:56 am on Wed, Mar 23, 2011.
Neil,
I liked Ike, too. Remember his famous statement made in his last state of the union address? "Beware of the military-industrial complex!" Ike was a prophet, wasn't he!
Slabside posted at 2:42 pm on Wed, Mar 23, 2011.
Eisenhower was undeniably the foremost military man in the world, and he was being pushed by the chickenhawks to send U.S. troops to Vietnam to relieve the French garrison at Dien Bien Phu, where the French occupiers were being booted out after 94 years of colonial rule. Neil, the chickenhawks as you call them didn't have much choice. France was our ally and refused to grant Indochina (Vietnam) independence. America almost always stands with their allies.
EmperorSmith posted at 4:30 pm on Wed, Mar 23, 2011.
What's in Libya? Oh OIL that france wants so let them take it. Why us?
VofReason posted at 1:01 pm on Thu, Mar 24, 2011.
Mentioning Obama and Eisenhower in the same column is a bit of a stretch- especially when talking military intervention. One was the Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in WWII and a decorated General and one was a community organizer. Yes, Obama plays basketball also and so does Michael Jordan.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:28 am on Fri, Mar 25, 2011.
VofReason,
And you point is? Wisdom comes in all sorts of boxes, different sizes, shapes and backgrounds. Lack of wisdom comes free and largely unpackaged. Karl Rove is busy packaging lack of wisdom. He has made a career of it, dropping out of school to become the greatest spin doctor of all times.
Dale Whiting posted at 2:24 pm on Fri, Mar 25, 2011.
Smitty,
While Libya is only the eighth largest producer of oil and Saudi Arabia has promissed to take up that slack, every barrel of oil not produced in Libya has the potential to strain the market. Oil is a fungible good. Generally speaking crude oil is crude oil regardless of where it is or is not produced. The interest of France is not in Libyan oil. Libya sells more oil products in Germany than in France, and more product in Itally than in Germany.
Once again, your statement makes little sense and is not especially well informed.