We're discovering there's several different shades of an "unwinnable" war. I apologize in advance for nitpicking a phrase/idea like "Iraq=Vietnam", but I believe there's a larger framework that needs to be addressed. Another advance apology is offered, because I've spent the bulk of the last 10 years behind a microphone, so I'm too used to boiling my statements down to a quick burst of chewable words. I'm in a transition into the world of academia, and I tend to get long-winded because of that...too much pent-up or unused words, I suppose.
There are quite a few similarities; anyone with more than a passing glance at news and headlines over the last 18 months can see that. The larger framework that I feel needs to be addressed is a lack of institutional memory. Sure, it's obvious the Bush Administration failed to realize some of the basic things we allegedly learned from Vietnam, but the biggest problem to me (and this is the only time Iraq and 9/11 should be linked) is that the United States government (no matter what party is in power) fails to transfer the lessons learned from one administration to another.
The phrase "lack of institutional memory" comes to me courtesy of former Sec. of Defense Robert McNamara. His book "Argument Without End" was such a thorough analysis of the Vietnam War, it's caused me to look at our government through that lens. If you're not familiar with the book, the general idea is this: McNamara and other US officials from that era came together with their counterparts from Vietnam in a series of meetings and lectures with the intent of figuring out why Vietnam happened the way it did. McNamara asserts that the lack of institutional memory keeps a concise flow of information from happening because of distrust when the White House changes hands. This definitely happened in the case of Al-Qaeda, as we found out the warnings of Clinton's NSA went largely ignored by the Bush Adminstration.
Perhaps the biggest point in McNamara's book is the most simplistic. We failed in Vietnam because there were massive failures in communication on both sides of the war. The US and the VC misinterpreted each other's actions so much, it cause a huge escalations when both sides so desperately wanted peace. Simply put, we read them wrong, and they read us wrong. This is happening today in Iraq. We misread everything about Iraq. Yes, Saddam Hussein was evil, but everything past that...we royally read wrong.
For a brief moment, put aside the protests, the no-bid Halliburton contracts, the photo-ops on the USS Abraham Lincoln and Thanksgiving, and let's attempt to approach this as simply as possible. If the US was intent on overthrowing Hussein, they should have known and expected every single possible outcome. There's a significant culture gap, a language gap and it's in the very heart of a region which, despite our consistent flow of dollars in exchange for oil, doesn't really care for us a whole lot.
We should have known. Either we were ignorant, or ill-prepared, and both of those scenarios is unacceptable. The public knows this, so we can re-introduce the thousands at home and abroad who protested the invasion. By not knowing (not caring as well?) we proved that we were just out to flex our muscles, and in not knowing the hell we would spawn with our invasion, gave our true Public Enemy #1 (OBL/Al-Qaeda) exactly what they wanted. We asserted our force, which was interpreted as hegemony by our enemy (and a lot of our friends) which in turn empowered our enemy and gave them the fuel they needed to reload and recruit, all while precious resources, our integrity as a nation and most importantly, our citizens were redeployed away from pursuit of our enemy and towards folly designed solely for a show of force.
We haven't learned, and we aren't learning. Let's say Kerry is elected in November. Do we attempt to erase this lack of institutional memory? Would the Bush Administration hand over their files on terrorism and counter-terrorism? Or would they tell the new administation "go fuck yourself?" And even if they did turn everything over, how can we accept it as quality information, when the Bush Administration has lied and obfuscated to the point where the word of our government is no longer trusted and our operatives in the field can be outed for spite and political gain?
I don't envy either of the presidential candidates. The rift is too vast to even come anywhere close to healing it in the next four years, and with our commitments overseas, we don't have time to heal. We have problems in progress that need steady, capable hands. It's going to be a thankless job, and I'd bet a large amount that the incumbent party in 2008 will have a huge fight in keeping the White House.
Of course, that leads to more lack of institutional memory...and... well... it just goes downhill from here, doesn't it?