About 20 years ago, I discovered the New York Times and its op-ed columnists. Wow, those people writing those little articles every other day seemed to be so smart. They had plenty of insight and answers – or so it seemed. After about a decade of digesting their many words and thoughts, it finally struck me that they didn’t have any monopoly on political wisdom (even if they continue to think so). It was time for me to move on to other sources of thought and opinion (although I did regret leaving Russell Baker behind – I loved his humorous take-offs of Pentagon boondoggles, especially his fictional account of an over-loaded military blimp that dropped lime Jello on Belleville, NJ, which is just a few towns away from me!).<\/p>\n
Since the Iraq invasion, I started reading some NYT op-ed pieces once more. Especially Tom Friedman, who seems to be the Times’ op-ed prima donna these days. And guess what? Once more, I found that that Friedman and company don’t have any lock on wisdom and insight.<\/p>\n
The thing about Freidman that irks me just a bit is his assumption that he and his column can turn Mr. Bush’s misbegotten Iraqi adventure into a campaign for Arab reform and Middle Eastern democracy. Yea, they do have their egos over there at the NY Times. As though Tom Friedman’s magisterial forgiveness of Mr. Bush for his mistakes regarding weapons of mass destruction was going to inspire the Bush Administration into providing the resource commitments that might have stabilized Iraq, restarted its economy, and set it on the way to becoming an exemplary Arab state. As though Tom’s wise words were going to reform the impoverished breeding grounds of misunderstanding, hatred and terrorism in the Middle East and thus save the West from more Al Qaeda-style violence.<\/p>\n
The other day, Friedman said that the current anti-American movement in Iraq could not be compared to the Vietcong situation in Vietnam back in the Sixties, because the Vietcong were a legitimate expression of nationalism, and the shadowy forces attacking our troops today are not.<\/p>\n
Tom, I’ve got a hot flash for you. The Vietcong were never the people’s first choice in Southern Vietnam. There were (and still are) all kinds of ethnic and religious groups in Vietnam, and most of them did not buy into the Communist \/ totalitarian ideals that the Cong were trying to spread. But the alternatives that we, and the French before us, presented to them just seemed so much worse. The Ho Chi Minh movement was extremely well executed. Their philosophies of government were (and still are) awful, but their organizing skills and political strategies and military tactics were nothing short of brilliant. They were students of history, well in tune with thousands of years of experience under the domination of foreigners (especially the Chinese). The French were not very much in tune with that experience, and the Americans even less so.<\/p>\n
We and our lackeys in Vietnam could never get our act together, despite millions of dollars and thousands of soldiers and jet planes and ships and all kinds of nation-building stuff. Yes, nationalism was ultimately involved in our defeat, but mainly as a choice that Vietnamese peasants made between two equally bad forms of government, one home-brewed, the other from some far-off world. In choosing between poisons, people usually take the home-brewed one.<\/p>\n
As to whoever or whatever is fighting the US in Iraq these days, I won’t claim that they are comparable to the Vietcong, having brilliant strategies and deep historical groundings. But I think it can be said that by now, the people of Iraq have learned that the US troops are not a panacea for everything that ails them. After a year, they still see a lot of unemployment and disorder and lack of basic things like water and electricity and health care. They are starting to see Uncle Sam’s boys as another form of poison, and a very foreign one. Their local choices seem to be another nasty government run by a maniac strongman, or a fundamentalist Moslem regime. I.e., two alternative forms of poison. But home-brewed poison. And that’s where the Vietcong analogy gets its traction, despite Mr. Friedman’s hasty dismissal of it.<\/p>\n
Should I give up on Times columnists once again? Maybe, but it is fun to occasionally debunk them in all their pomposity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
About 20 years ago, I discovered the New York Times and its op-ed columnists. Wow, those people writing those little articles every other day seemed to be so smart. They had plenty of insight and answers – or so it seemed. After about a decade of digesting their many words and thoughts, it finally struck […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/638"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=638"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/638\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}