Pentagon official calls for assault on Constitution

January 13, 2007

I used to marvel at the irony of attending Republican conventions in states and counties across the nation, where ceremonies would open with the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag, and the nation, ideals and government it stands for, and where speaker after speaker would then assault every aspect of that same nation and government. In the Vietnam era and a decade afterward, frequently these speeches would include rhetorical questions like, “Do we really need a First Amendment?” in reference to protestors, or the speech of anyone that the speaker found disagreeable.

This is a new height: The New York Times reports this morning that a top Pentagon official is bothered that lawyers defend prisoners in the U.S., especially prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — somehow forgetting that lawyers are obligated to do such things by their ethical canons, their state laws and state licensing rules, and by the Constitution. Then he urges corporations who use those same lawyers to stop paying them.

Is this a joke, or can someone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution actually be so clueless?

The senior Pentagon official in charge of military detainees suspected of terrorism said in an interview this week that he was dismayed that lawyers at many of the nation’s top firms were representing prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and that the firms’ corporate clients should consider ending their business ties.

The comments by Charles D. Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, produced an instant torrent of anger from lawyers, legal ethics specialists and bar association officials, who said Friday that his comments were repellent and displayed an ignorance of the duties of lawyers to represent people in legal trouble.

The Wall Street Journal joined in the assault on the Constitution in an editorial, according to the news story.

Stanley Kubrick is dead, or I’d think that this was just a review of a Stanley Kubrick follow-up to Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Bomb.

Any corporation official who fires the company’s attorneys for representing Guantanamo Bay detainees should be fired himself — he’s acting contrary to the interests of his stockholders in getting rid of the best legal team he could hire.

How do such barbarians an anti-American people get to be officials in the Pentagon, and editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal?

More information:

Blog reactions:

2 Comments | Civil Rights, Current History, Democracy, Dissent, Ethics, Iraq, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Patriotism, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Applying the lessons of Vietnam in Afghanistan and Iraq, part 1

January 12, 2007

In pedagogy, the indicator that a lesson has been learned manifests in changes in actions, not in a high score on a paper test.

Did the United States really learn the lessons of Vietnam?  Can we even say, with assurance, what those lessons are?

Lesson 1:  Support of a corrupt government often leads to disaster.  One  of the continuing problems of U.S. policy in Vietnam was that the South Vietnam governments were usually corrupt.  Citizens knew that.  A people rarely loves a corrupt government, unless the corruption inures to the benefit of the people — a degree of graft may be tolerated, for example, if the garbage is picked up on time and the streets are cleared after snow storms.  People quickly lose patience with corruption that does not benefit them, however, and South Vietnam’s government simply could not get basic services to work well.

One might have hoped the U.S. learned the lesson, especially when Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Indiana, recommended to President Ronald Reagan that the U.S. not pledge military support for Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos, because of the corruption in the Marcos government.  As a result, the Philippines today has a democratic government, not one that works with great efficiency (which may be a hallmark of true democracy), but a government that the people understand is elected by them.  Similarly, governments of Eastern Bloc nations under communism frequently were corrupt.  The swift changes that occurred after Poland’s defection from communism and the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the collapse of the Soviet Union, led to massive change.  Where the new governments are not corrupt (Poland, the Czech Republic, Germany) or even just less corrupt, popular support is stronger and national recovery is a genuine hope, if not reality.

Of course, the U.S. was burned by this policy in Iran.  When Jimmy Carter’s administration refused to back the increasingly corrupt and unpopular government of the Shah of Iran, revolutionaries found other reasons to lash out at the U.S.  A wise person may contemplate that at least the U.S. has not been involved in a continuing war in Iran since the 1980s.

But the lesson stands.  One would think that the U.S. would make great effort to assure non-corrupt government in Iraq and Afghanistan, and make the strongest possible effort to make clean government manifest to the local population and the world at large. One might be unsure that is happening today.

In Vietnam, communist forces were trained along the model that Mao Zedong had used in China against the Japanese, and then against the Nationalist army:  Train in military methods, and emphasize the political aspects of the war, too.  Mao’s army had songs they were required to memorize that emphasized high moral conduct of the soldier, with verses that encouraged full payment to anyone from whom anything was taken, such as food or shelter.  Such actions would encourage civilians to support the army, Mao correctly hypothesized.  Ho Chi Minh’s forces did not practice the rules perfectly, but, for example, they were successful often in pointing out that the destruction of cropland was not their doing, but was instead the result of U.S. war efforts.  Vietnamese citizens may not have strongly supported Ho’s forces, but neither did they support the Army of the Republic of South Vietnam.  When the reason for the fighting is unclear, fighting often cannot be successful.  Corruption in a government makes reasons to support that government suspect, fogging the reasons to fight for it.

Cleaning up corruption in Iraq’s government should be a very high priority of U.S. policy. 

[This is the first of a series of posts on the Lessons of Vietnam.]

3 Comments | History, Iraq, Leadership, Lessons of Vietnam, Vietnam | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Churchill, on war and executions

January 2, 2007

“When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite.”

  • Winston Churchill, The Second World War: Moral of the Work, vol. III, The Grand Alliance (1950)

Churchill, 1946 portrait by Douglas Chandor, Smithsonian (NatlPortraitGall)

 

  • Sir Winston Churchill, 1946 portrait by Douglas Chandor, courtesy of Smithsonian Institution, National Portrait Gallery, Washington, D.C.

 

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy, Good Quotes, History, Iraq, Winston Churchill | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Help tell the story of Iraq veterans

November 12, 2006

I stumbled on an interesting film project, to tell the story of Iraq veterans readjusting to life in the U.S. after duty in Iraq. On this day after Veterans’ Day, you may be looking for ways to honor vets. Donating to the completion of this movie is one way. You be the judge.

The film’s working title is “Reserved to Fight,” focusing on one of the first Army Reserve units called to duty in Iraq, and what happens to four of the members of the unit upon their return. The unit is Fox Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Marines, whose home is Salt Lake City, Utah. The film’s director is Chantelle Squires, a film student at Brigham Young University. Film production classes there are generally top-notch. The project will be well done, and the content should be compelling in almost any production.

We need not wait for a latter-day Clint Eastwood to chronicle these events 50 years from now, as he has done for veterans of Iwo Jima in the film Flags of Our Fathers.  (See my earlier posts here, and here.) I hope to see more efforts to record this war’s history, in any medium.

Tip of the old scrub brush to Utah Boy.

6 Comments | Current History, History, History video sources, Iraq, War | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Tipping point against . . . what? Obituary for America

September 30, 2006

Update:  You probably ought to read Coturnix’s views at Blog Around the Clock, “We are now officially living in a dictatorship.”  God willing, he is not correct.
My first observation: Fox reporter Chris Wallace asked a question proposed by a listener in e-mail — probably hoping to embarrass Bill Clinton. Clinton took the question knew exactly what it was intended to do, and delivered a Philippic* on how Clinton worked to get Osama bin Laden before September 2001, that rather stunned people used to Democrats rolling over and letting half-truths win. It was front page in the Dallas Morning News (the Associated Press story, with a photo), and the talk of the internet.

Second observation: Clinton’s interview prompted this, a letter from a mother who lost her daughter on September 11, 2001. It turns out not all of the survivors of the victims of the initial attack think the current administration handled things well, either before or after the attack, and it appears there may be a minor flood of complaints from this quarter.

Third observation: Historians familiar with the Alien and Sedition Acts and their effects on America (prompting the ouster of John Adams from office, making him the first one-term president) couldn’t help but wonder when Congress last week approved bills to authorize activities in capturing and detaining prisoners from the campaign against terrorism. These activities previously ruled been ruled unAmerican by the Supreme Court — or unconstitutional, at least.

Are we at a tipping point now? Has public opinion made a turn that will be a topic for future history tests, on the war against terror and the Bush administration? (Malcolm Gladwell, what do you say?)

This morning’s e-mail brought this, an obituary for America, by Larry Butts:

An Obituary by Larry Butts

America (1776 – 2006)

America, often referred to by her nickname “Land of the Free,” was killed today in Washington, DC, by a drunk driver. The driver has been identified only as Commander in Chief. She had been ill recently. Read the rest of this entry »

7 Comments | Bill of Rights, Current History, Dissent, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Iraq | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Preserving history, for veterans

August 13, 2006

Subsunk over at Blackfive has a question he asks soldiers returning from Iraq. It’s a great question, one that should be asked of every returning soldier.

This is a reminder that history is not just what the academic historians say it is. History is the story of the people who were there, recorded by anyone. You can do your bit for history, too. Go read Blackfive’s post, and think seriously about asking others a similar question. Then record and publish the answer.

We know a lot more about Thomas Jefferson’s views on matters than George Washington, but not because reporters and historians covered Jefferson better. Jefferson wrote it all down, and preserved it, for future generations. Even much of the embarrassing stuff. Washington was much more reserved, often recording in his diary only the weather for the day.

Such recording is, ultimately, the beginning of real civilization. We have a duty to make records to preserve our own memories, and to provide lights for those who follow us — either lights on the path, or lighthouses warning of the rocks.

Blackfive’s question: “What did you do over there that you are proudest of?”

1 Comment | Current History, History, Iraq | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Next Entries »