H. Thomas Hayden was formerly the President and CEO of First Communications Company (FCC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, a joint venture between Raytheon and a Saudi Company involved in Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) Systems for the Ministry of Defense and Aviation, Saudi Arabian National Guard and Ministry of Interior. Before retiring from the US Marine Corps, assignments included Commanding Officer (CO), Headquarters and Service Bn, 1st Force Service Support Group, which deployed to the Gulf War, CO Brigade Service Support Group – 9, which deployed to Somalia and CO MAU Service Support Group – 33, which deployed to The Philippines and Korea. He was Branch Head, Headquarters Marine Corps, Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (SO/LIC), and Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for SO/LIC with assignments to Central America. He has participated in combat operations or contingency operations in the Republic of Vietnam, Central America, Gulf War, Somalia, and Colombia. Tom has a MBA, MA in International Relations, and a PhD candidate in Business Management. He is the author of two books and is currently writing a third: SHADOW WAR: Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict; WARFIGHTING: Maneuver Warfare in the US Marine Corps. He has published over 40 articles and has been awarded the Navy League’s Alfred Thayer Mahan award for literary achievement.
Try as they may, they cannot connect Vietnam to Iraq
January 15, 2004
[Have an opinion on this column? Sound off in the discussion forum.]
When you live in the Washington, D. C. area, The
Washington Post does provide some useful information on local
movies, D.C. crime, and sports. However, in the national debate on
problems with current policies in Iraq,
and what may be some historical and proven solutions, The Washington
Post does not have a clue. Nor are they interested.
It would seem that The Washington Post has some kind of agenda, but
I cannot figure it out. They place Anti-Iraq War, Anti-Bush, and Anti-U.S.
Servicemen articles on the Front page, the "Style" section, and now
the "Business" section.
When it comes to contribution to national debate and publication of
potential solutions to the mismanagement of Iraq by L. Paul Bremmer,
and the "Authority," the only historical analogy The Post can use
to fit its fantasy imagination of Iraq is another Vietnam.
On December 28, 2003, there was an interesting juxtaposition of the
two lead articles in Sunday's Outlook section of The Washington Post.
One proclaimed to show the oppression of women in the Islamic world
and one proclaimed to show the oppression of sovereignty in the United
States.
How can The Washington Post say that "attacking Iraq never enjoyed
the level of public support that the war in Vietnam did"?
We had a bipartisan vote in both Houses of Congress to support the
War in Iraq. We had, and still have, a large public opinion poll supporting
the war, and all current military leaders were and are behind the
President.
Some newspapers just do not get it. Trying to twist history to support
a weak thesis is the lowest form of journalism.
Even on Vietnam, The Washington Post still does not get it.
I served in Vietnam from Apr 1967 to Jun 1969, and the war against
the Viet Cong insurgency was won after the VC and North Vietnams TET
Offensive of 1968. The people did not support the North Vietnamese
Army in 1968 or 1970. Even after U.S. troop withdrawal started in
1970, and was well underway in 1972, the South Vietnamese people did
not support the North Vietnamese invasion in the "Easter Offensive"
of 1972. It was not a bare-footed VC peasant that knocked down the
gate to the Presidential Palace in Saigon in 1975, it was a North
Vietnamese Army T-52 tank, after the U.S. Congress failure to live
up to the support promised the South Vietnamese after the so-called
"Paris Peace Accords."
I also served in the First Gulf War from Aug 1990 to Jun 1991, and
I lived in the Middle East, based in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 1999
to 2002. There is very little comparison with Vietnam and the Second
Gulf War.
The rhetoric of Cheney and Wolfowitz aside, the majority of the Administration
and the American people recognize that the current battles in Iraq
are against the remnants of the Ba'athist leaders and former militia
called the Fayadeen, who have lost power, prestige and money. They
are attempting one last-gasp struggle to disrupt a new Iraqi government.
It is called vengeance and envy. Unfortunately, the Bremer policies
for dealing with these problems are a little late and weak on implementation.
Contrary to The Washington Post, America is not isolated in the world,
and this is clearly shown with the vast Coalition support, and the
French, German and Russian decision to forgive Iraqi debt and start
a positive approach to Iraq. Even the Japanese show of support and
their decision to send troops must be a great surprise to The Washington
Post.
I'm not sure if you can credit Iraq, but the American economy is rebounding
nicely, and the American military is enjoying newfound pride and popular
support.
It must really frost The Washington Post that many wounded American
troops are concealing their wounds so they will not be sent home.
Even now, we have Marine Corps and other Army units preparing to return
to Iraq, and I see no major demonstrations of opposition to Iraq and
no real comparison to Vietnam.
So, to The Washington Post, I ask, What does Vietnam have to do with
Iraq? The alleged premiere newspaper in the greater Washington, D.
C. area has become irrelevant in public and private debate on how
to improve the situation in Iraq.
