Basra: Iraqi Tet?
This NY TImes article by Frank Rich compares the recent fighting in Basra to an Iraqi “mini-Tet.” He thinks it’s a shame that today’s press—unlike the MSM’s behavior right after the real Tet offensive—hasn’t really played up what he sees as a big defeat for our side, and that so few Americans seem concerned:
That’s why it’s no surprise that so few stopped to absorb the disastrous six-day battle of Basra that ended last week—a mini-Tet that belied the “success” of the surge.
The real situation in Basra is much harder to read, of course. This is due to the usual fog of war, plus the fact that Basra is a campaign in which Iraqis are far more heavily involved—and the US less so—than in the past.
Richard Fernandez has written time and again on his blog about the difficulty of getting a clear score card at this early date on Basra (for example here—and take a look at the comments sections for a fuller appreciation of the possible range of viewpoints, and how difficult it is to know for sure what’s happening there). Frederick Kagan has a take that I find fairly compelling, one that acknowledges the many unknowns.
But Rich is almost breathtaking in his arrogant assumption that he knows the full story of Basra when he cannot at this point; and in his abysmal ignorance—of history, from which most of the fog lifted long ago. I’m referring to his characterization of Tet itself, which follows the original Cronkite line with virtually no deviation, as though all the corrective scholarship between 1968 and now had never happened.
For Rich and at least some of his ultra-liberal MSM companions, perhaps it never has. Time—and their knowledge of the Vietnam War—seems to have stopped at their heyday, back when none other than the great Cronkite himself declared the Tet offensive lost by the US and the South Vietnamese before he had time to understand much about it except his own foggy impressions.
I’ve written at length about Cronkite and those times, so I won’t repeat myself here (see this and this, as well as this book and this summary of it for more details on how and why the press got it so very wrong).
The are indeed parallels between Basra and Tet, but they’re not what Rich imagines. This comment by “Ditch” expresses the comparison rather succinctly, I think:
[Basra] strikes me as an Iraqi Tet. Reported immediately by the media as a huge loss for the US, lapped up by doves as the same, while the hard data actually says the opposite.
This, of course, is the real significance of Tet, as widely agreed to at this point. Perhaps even the Sadr Iraqis know that, and are attempting to play the press like a violin.
And yet Frank Rich manages to make the analogy to Tet unironically, considering it a defeat for our side with no hint that he’s ever heard of any other interpretation, or that he’s aware of the role of the press in distorting the story.
And now it seems he wants to repeat the process. Is Rich truly as ignorant of history as he sounds? Or does he just believe the American public is? And, if his ignorance is real, is it because he’s traveled in his Pauline Kael bubble so long that it’s become opaque?
The fog of this war is pretty much created and nourished in American editorial board rooms.
Liberals have been dreaming for an Iraqi Tet just like the original Cronkite version since this started.
My vote is they are all willfully obtuse. The hippy baby boomer’s want to relive their glory years.
Vietnam = Iraq.
Gen. Petraeus’ next round of hearings will be very interesting now that the MSM has finally found their new Tet.
Frank Rich is merely reading from the Lefty Scriptures as originally proclaimed by the media during Vietnam. In his eyes any newer editions or abridgements are heresies. His faith in the original scriptures remains strong.
For two good analyses of the Basra campaign read this from Right Wing Nuthouse at:
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2008/03/31/can-we-just-walk-away-from-iraq/
The blogger, Rick Moran, is wondering if Basra isn’t the nail in the coffin of the argument for staying in Iraq.
His post and the Basra operation are then analysed by GW at Wolf Howling. Read it at:
http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com/2008/04/assumptions-conclusions-about-sadr.html
The time involved will be worth it if you want to get a better handle on what is happening in Iraq right now.
Oh , how nice, Frank Rich is now a strategic genius. Imangine, a theatre critic expounding on close quarter,urban combat,
Cronkite was lying sack in ’68,so Rich is carrying the bag 40 years on . The tradition continues
I for one wonder, not for the first time, why you expend your considerable gifts even bothering with such a tool as Rich and the rag that pays him.
The New York Times commentary here and elsewhere has got to stop, lest all the sphere devolve into a footnote to the Times.
We really must move beyond this.
The most important part of the Tet myth is not that the press got it wrong in the immediacy of the offensive. It is that the press continues to have it wrong 40 years later.
To embrace error so completely for so long takes an extreme degree of dishonesty.
I wonder if we didn’t manufacture the situation to give Iraqi security forces a chance to prove their worth and trump up their morale, this is the story I’ve heard from some public affairs personnel in the Military, but not even they would know the answer to this. However, if this is true, then US forces are confident of an easy victory with high dividends of Iraqi self-government.
Jimmy J–The Wolf Howling link was great. Thanks.
nyomythos,
This was not “manufactured” as an opportunity for a proving ground for the Iraqi military. When the British forces occupied Southern Iraq, they tended to take a mostly hands-off approach to the political infrastructure in and around Basra. For the years before they left Basra, the British were criticized by our commanders for allowing Iran to set its tentacles so deeply in their sector, and the British blue blooded generals would fire back that we were being too brutal and aggressive and that we were the reason the country was not pacified. It was most unfortunate for the British soldier and junior officers that 10 Downing Street took a heavy hand in how operations were to be conducted: on the cheap, not enough ammo and equipment, and with the view always to their restive citizens in the U.K. who wanted out of the war completely. So, you hunker down and pretty much sally forth only when absolutely necessary and even then with a low risk approach. Well, the Iranian cockroaches took over, and we were stuck with the bill when Tommie went home.
Basra is not a mini-Tet. But, there is one similarity with Tet: the enemy got his butt kicked and suffered very heavy casualties. Which leads to my second point.
The Left is absolutely ignorant of any dense comprehension of the facts of what happened to the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army during the 1968 Tet Offensive. It was an overwhelming defeat for the Communists, who lost everything save the cheap, venal propaganda proffered by our Leftist media. The Communists were annihilated everywhere. What was really impressive about that campaign was the tenacity and effectiveness of many ARVN units, who fought the Communists with a stunning determination. The only place where the Communists could hang on for awhile was in Hue, but even there it was an appalling defeat for the Communists.
I don’t take Frank Rich seriously. The man is a tool and a fool. I AM amazed that with all the books and articles available about what really happened at Tet that the legend/myth of an American and South Vietnamese defeat can still have a toehold.
The Iranian al Quds units in Southern Iraq and elsewhere in the country are not nearly as numerous or effective as the Communists were in South Vietnam. Let’s be rational here: al Sadr’s gangs were Iranian proxies – trained, armed, and directed from Tehran, however much al Sadr dissembles on that point.
Well I heard today that Sadr is offering to give up. So much for Tet.
Ah, but ground truth is irrelevant to liberals. Its Vietnam all over again because they say so. It was the most perfect moment in history for them, not in what actually happened on the ground, but because of the picture they have been successfully able to fabricate and keep alive ever since; that of a United States defeated and humbled before the brown people they hoped to oppress and homogenize.
At its core, its about not having the US to be successful at anything. We’re not suppose to accomplish anything because it would make some here in the US feel bad in not having any personal courage, commitments or moral convictions. Seeing the “big-guy” on campus fail at something makes them feel better about themselves. Why not make the principal behind the effort seem a useless endeavor in the first place? This is why the Vietnam template works so well with them.
What this means is that, as far as the left is concerned, we’ve already lost this war before it got started. We cant win. If we do, I think most liberals would realize that mediocrity wont cut it in a big picture world, and that you really cant be a major player in such a world that is unforgiving of fools. (think Jimmy Carter).
The dreams of the average slacker that would not, or could not bring themselves to do the hard work it takes to excel in what is needed to actually be successful, become shattered when placed besides a successful effort that took hard determination and guts to acquire. This is why we must lose at all cost.
FredHjr has it right
As for Tet vs Basra, I don’t see any comparison. Tet was a Viet Cong offensive all across South Vietnam. Basra is the Iraqi Army being sent in to clean out a mess that the Brits let develop. There is no Iraqi-wide offensive by AQI, the Mahdi Army, or anyone else.
Bottom line is that the left must be pretty desperate to portray Basra as Tet, which means that the Democrats in Congress will probably do just that tomorrow and Wednesday when Gen Petraeus and Amb Crocker testify.
Yes, I agree that the conflation of Tet February 1968 and the Maliki government/U.S. military offensive against the al Sadr Iranian proxies is a fiction in the mind of brains that lack enough data. For starters, I doubt these MSM s**theads understand that in Iraq it is we who have had the initiative.
Oh, and if these idiots think that some mortars and rockets hitting the Green Zone for a while compares with the VC sappers who actually penetrated the compound of the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, well they’ve spent too much time with Jamaican Gold in the bong pipe.
In any event, even with the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, within 24 hours all the enemy were killed or captured. As I stated earlier, the only objective of the Communists where they held for a long period of time was being holed up in the Citadel at Hue, where we made their lives a living hell until we killed ’em all or they slinked away just before we shut the door on the last causeway into the Citadel.
These idiots that you refer to are likely to be in control of US government policy from 2009 through 2012 at least. These leftist media tools are only a reflection of the leftist undercurrent that also controls the US Congress.
For a shorter read and a decent picture of how we did screw up, I again recommend Harry Summers’s On Strategy: A Critical Analysis of the Viet Nam War.
The story of Basra riots made clear one important point: it is impossible to completely stabilise Iran or, wider, the whole Middle East, untill Iran is allowed to sponsor terrorism in the region. Only after decisive defeat of this malignant regime the mission can be accomplished. The tentacles of this octopus, like Syria, Hamas and Hesbolla, also need to be severed. And after this West must stop Saudi sponsoring its Wahhabist indoctrination everywhere: this is second echelon of jihad by demographical conquest and ideological expansion. This is an ambitious program, it will take several decades, and it necessary should include Western recolonization of failed and rogue states in Asia and Africa.
Frank Poor and the New York Past Times Never Vary. I’m surprised they’re not calling it “Bull Run” or “Ardennes.”
Nothing the left does shocks me. If it makes America look good then it gets buried except for the internet Fox and AM radio. If America looks bad, then it’s splashed all over the news. As has been pointed out the Tet Offensive was a stunning military defeat for the commies. Even if the battle was a stalemate the mere fact that Iraq’s army did most of the heavy lifting is cause for celebration. At least for those who live in the real world.
A friend of mine is fond of pointing out that “Stupid people don’t know they’re stupid”, but malign people surely know they’re malign. Frank Rich and his ilk are both.
John Russell: In order to do that they’d have to know something about military history.
There is a good article on the topic in National Review on line. An exerpt:
“http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTk5MTE1YmI0
NzQyMjQzYWNjY2RlYmVhZjk4YzlhODI=”
Tet was launched by the enemy and Basra was initiated by the government; Tet was nationwide and this was subregional; Tet was an attempt by the Communists to foment a people’s uprising to overthrow the South Vietnamese government and in Basra the enemy was at best seeking to defend their local criminal enterprises.
I know I’m stupid. The trick is hiding it from everyone else.
How am I doing so far?
Sergey, Im affraid you’re missing the point. None of you brought up matters. Basra is Tet just because they say so.
Im sorry, I meant to say
“none of what you brought up matters”
um, for the reasons I stated.
I know the writing of Pauline Kael quite well. But what is a Pauline Kael bubble? Does it mean someone who is a critic but not in the real world – or something similar to that?
Matt, I believe it’s a reference to 1972, when Nixon defeated McGovern in a landslide, and Pauline Kael is supposed to have said something like “How could Nixon have won? Nobody I know voted for him.”
A couple of background data concerning military and political conclusions concerning Basra collected here.
http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/maliki-vs-sadr-vs-armchair-observers/
But Rich is almost breathtaking in his arrogant assumption that he knows the full story of Basra when he cannot at this point
I am sure, Neo, that even if Rich accepted that he does not know the whole story, he also comprehends that he has the power and will to make it the whole story. Regardless of who has to get killed doing it. Such is the state of tribalism in American politics, where people hold ultimate loyalty, not to an America that has buttered their bread and protected their hides and progeny, but to certain ideological groups inside America that promise the Heavens to those that can get the dirty work of killing true American allies done.