- 2012elections - 9/11 Special Coverage - aca - africanamericanalzheimers - aids - Alabama News Network - american - Awards & Expo - bees - bilingual - border - californiaeducation - Caribbean - cir - citizenship - climatechange - collgeinmiami - community - democrats - ecotourism - Elders - Election 2012 - elections2012 - escuelas - Ethnic Media in the News - Ethnicities - Events - Eye on Egypt - Fellowships - food - Foreclosures - Growing Up Poor in the Bay Area - Health Care Reform - healthyhungerfreekids - howtodie - humiliating - immigrants - Inside the Shadow Economy - kimjongun - Latin America - Law & Justice - Living - Media - memphismediaroundtable - Multimedia - NAM en Espaol - Politics & Governance - Religion - Richmond Pulse - Science & Technology - Sports - The Movement to Expand Health Care Access - Video - Voter Suppression - War & Conflict - 攔截盤查政策 - Top Stories - Immigration - Health - Economy - Education - Environment - Ethnic Media Headlines - International Affairs - NAM en Español - Occupy Protests - Youth Culture - Collaborative Reporting

Afghanistan Is Obama’s Vietnam

New America Media, Commentary, Earl Ofari Hutchinson Posted: Sep 01, 2009

In August 2007, Sen. Barack Obama, fresh on the presidential campaign trail, made an impassioned promise at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars to wage what he dubbed the war that has to be won. The war is the war in Afghanistan. He promised to quickly get out of Iraq, corral America’s allies in a partnership to wipe out the terrorists and their mass destructive weapons, end corruption, hold free elections, and insure a stable government in Afghanistan.

Two years and a shell-out of $230 billion later, with more than 700 U.S. dead, not one of these goals has been met. There’s absolutely no guarantee that the requested $65 billion (more than that budgeted for Iraq) and 17,000 added troops (which will bring troop deployment in Afghanistan close to the number in Iraq) will bring the United States closer to zapping al Qaeda and installing a corruption free, democratic government there. Military analysts, Pentagon insiders and the Joint Chiefs agree that to attain anything faintly close to Obama’s goals in Afghanistan will take a long hard slog that will cost billions more and take thousands more American troops (with increased casualties).

From his early speeches and now administration war policy set in stone, Obama is doggedly convinced that the Afghan war can be won, no matter the cost. And he’s willing to stake the credibility of his administration on that, no matter the price. The price is high. A mid-August Washington Post-ABC News poll found that more Americans than ever say the war is pure folly. A majority of Obama’s most fervent backers say the same. These are the supporters Obama will need to beat back the mounting GOP counterinsurgency, make gains or at least cut potential Democratic losses in the mid-term elections in 2010, and to vigorously pump his shaky health care reform package. With grumbles from liberal Democrats and progressives getting louder about Obama’s betrayal and backsliding on his campaign promises, Afghanistan looms even larger as Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s Vietnam.

Vietnam is the dreaded word that presidents Lyndon Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Geroge Bush heard about Vietnam, Somalia, and Iraq, respectively. It’s still the poster war for a failed, flawed, and hopelessly unwinnable war. It soured public opinion, drained the economy, fueled public dismay and anger, hampered passage of their domestic programs, fractured their party, and stirred big losses in Congress.

Public shell shock over unpopular wars always redounds to the advantage of an incumbent challenging a president whose name is linked to the war. In 1952, Eisenhower ran on the pledge to visit Korea if elected. Though he never directly promised to bring the troops home if elected, the implicit commitment was that if elected, he’d do that. He really didn’t have to make that promise. Public weariness over the war was so great that Eisenhower's generic oath to visit the troops was enough to help sink Truman. In the public’s mind, the Korean War had become Truman’s war or, more accurately, Truman’s failure to win the war.

Similarly, Nixon learned from Eisenhower. During the presidential campaign against Democratic Vice-President Hubert Humphrey in 1968, Nixon dropped politically calculated hints of a “secret plan” to end the Vietnam War if elected. Like Eisenhower, he didn’t spell out in any real detail just what his secret plan was. And he didn’t really have to. Public revulsion over Vietnam, as in Korea, was so great that even the scintilla of a suggestion that Nixon could end the war aroused voter optimism for him and even greater fury against Humphrey, who was widely seen as the caretaker of Johnson’s war. (Johnson saw the handwriting on the wall and declined to run).

These two unpopular wars did in Truman and the Democrats in 1952, and Johnson and the Democrats in 1968. They also had a tsunami effect on Democratic elected officials. In both election years, the Democrats had a decisive edge over the Republicans in Congress, a wide body of public support, and political prestige. Eisenhower, and later Nixon, painted Korea and Vietnam as a hopeless muddle that Truman and Humphrey (in tandem with Johnson) had made a mess of. The two Democratic presidents paid dearly for it, and Bush and the Republicans paid just as dearly for the Iraq quagmire.

Obama knows this history well. He embedded that history into his presidential campaign and continually reminded voters of the history of the Iraq war failure. Financially draining wars take a huge toll on the economy, drag down public morale, and cause a steep plunge in American prestige internationally. They also whip up greater anti-American sentiment.

Three failed and flawed wars and the public’s distaste for those wars helped topple two sitting Democratic presidents, and hopelessly discredited a Republican president. The same public distaste for the Afghanistan war can easily make it Obama’s Vietnam. History has served notice on Obama of this peril.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His weekly radio show, “The Hutchinson Report” can be heard on weekly in Los Angeles at 9:30 AM Fridays on KTYM Radio 1460 AM and live streamed nationally on ktym.com.


Page 1 of 1

-->




Advertisement


ADVERTISEMENT


Just Posted

NAM Coverage

U.S. Politics