Sunday, August 13, 2006

Thoughts on American Indochina War

On Friday, I am making comment about American loss to Viet Cong in Indochina. Since then I have been thinking about your loss in that war, and whether you will lose the war against the Moslemics in Mesopotamia. Fighting an insurgent force is, by definition, not an undertaking for a man lacking in nerve and strength. The insurgent force possesses nerve and inner strength, for if a man is to fight an entire army, in his lone self, then he must be a man of great passion indeed. So Viet Cong have the passionate intensity of their beliefs. They are ruthless and willing to last until they win. But Americans are not ruthless and are inconstant, so they are losing their war. There are three errors I am seeing American regimes Johnson and Nixon presidencies making.

One: A true thing once said by a human is that an army marches on its stomach. Viet Cong must be getting supplies from somewhere. Nixon tried to stop flowing of supplies into Indochina by Ho Chi Minh Trail through bombings, but that is like trying to cure a dangerous infection by placing a wet washrag on the forehead to soothe the fever. You are but treating a symptom of disease by bombing Cambodia. In 1960s, Viet Cong are having powerful patron states--Soviet Union and China--who are allies to each other and enemies to United States. Dr. Kissinger, a wise man, understood that splitting one's enemies is the first step towards victory. But Kissinger is using ending of Indochina war to split Soviet Union and China. If Johnson had understood, he would be seeing that splitting Soviet Union and China would end Indochina war! But by Nixon, it is too late. Iraqi terrorists are having powerful allies in Mesopotamia--Syria and Iran. If Bush wishes to win war, he must split Syria and Iran, and cut off their aid to Iraqi militants. Now, in retetji wrestling, there is a thing which is called the yu'shav. This is a point on the opponent's body that when you push it, causes the opponent to fall. It is not always the same point; it depends on the position of the wrestler and his opponent. A good translation is "pivot point". Now, Syria's yu'shav is Lebanon. They are supplying Hesbullah because they are fearing Shi'a uprising fomented by Hesbullah radicals inside their own nation, and also they are irritated at Israel's existence. Now, what America must be doing is turning back Hesbullah upon Syria, like turning a dog on its master. This can be done two ways. One is by funding Hesbullah themselves. This is like feeding a vicious dog so it becomes your friend. The only problem is that Hesbullah is treacherous, and are not for trusting. The second option is to allow Israel to completely and utterly crush Hesbullah in Lebanon, so that the Hesbullah fighters give up in Lebanon. Then they will either go to Iraq or they will go to Syria. In Iraq you are already having a sizeable presence of troops, who can kill Hesbullah, so they will more likely become a problem for Assad. Iran is trickier, because Iran has many client states and no patron, so America has no leverage. Only force will do. America must not go to war with Iran, for it would be too costly and the rules of warfare state that no second front should be opened unless it lead to victory on the first. But Iran has no navy, and a small airforce. Therefore, bombing campaigns could work in this situation. If Johnson had been willing to bomb Peking, perhaps he could have forced the Chinese to renege on their support for the Viet Cong, but he was unwilling to do this because he feared the Soviets, who were the patron of the Chinese. But Iran has no patron, and there is little to fear from bombing, say, Iran's nuclear sites. Except, of course, for domestic protest, which is bringing me to...

Two: America is having many traitors during Indochina War, most infamous being Daniel Ellsberg, who is publishing classified documents in the New York Times. The failure of Johnson and Nixon regimes to appropriately arrest, incarcerate, and execute these traitors is leading to defeat. Now, you cannot fight a war if there is a "fifth column" inside your own walls, who does not fear reprisal. The publication of classified documents results in enemy strengthening and to further casualties. Also to weakness of your own regime. So far, Bush regime is being much more successful in suppressing traitors who would weaken the state. The State must be strong, which is the subject of...

Three: The State and the Nation must have the will to prosecute the war. The Viet Cong are knowing that if they can only outlast the Americans, they will win. Student protests give them hope. It is the same for Iraq. The Moslemic terrorists know that if they can outlast the Americans, Mesopotamia will be theirs. So it is vital that the State, in times of war, be unified. Dissent cannot be tolerated and must be crushed ruthlessly if victory is for achieving. This is tricky thing in America, because your obsession with "transparency" make appropriate actions by the police organs of the state mostly impossible. There are cowards in any nation, and worse, those who have an apathy, and worst of all those who hate the nation and wish to see it fall, but American suicidal love of "freedom of assembly" allows American cowards, apathetics, and haters to unify and form a bloc that is antithetical to the surviving of the nation. I do not see any way of correcting this, save the Hiroshima option: Be certain that your wars are so incredibly, absolutely--and most importantly, suddenly--devastating to the enemy that the war is over before it has begun, and before any concerted opposition forms. This is impractical in real life, which is why you Americans are destined to lose all your remaining wars. In revolutionary war, you are the insurgents, in civil war passions are inflamed, and in World War 2 you are trapped, backing into a wall, and must fight like a caged animal. But now America is strong, stronger than all other nations, and you have become like a bear chained in the center of an arena with dogs tearing at him. The bear is stronger than the dogs, but his fetters hold him down, and he dies. The worst is that you chained yourselves.

How you will get free, I do not know.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home