Michael Gerson rings the memory bell:
In 1974, a weary Congress cut off funds for Cambodia and South Vietnam, leading to the swift fall of both allies. In his memoir, “Years of Renewal,” Henry Kissinger tells the story of former Cambodian prime minister Sirik Matak, who refused to leave his country.
“I thank you very sincerely,” Matak wrote in response, “for your offer to transport me towards freedom. I cannot, alas, leave in such a cowardly fashion. As for you, and in particular for your great country, I never believed for a moment that you would have this sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty. You have refused us your protection, and we can do nothing about it. You leave, and my wish is that you and your country will find happiness under this sky. But, mark it well, that if I shall die here on the spot and in my country that I love, it is no matter, because we are all born and must die. I have only committed this mistake of believing in you [the Americans].”
Eventually, between 1 million and 2 million Cambodians were murdered by the Khmer Rouge when “peace” came to Indochina. Matak, Kissinger recounts, was shot in the stomach and died three days later.
Marx said that history repeats itself, the first time as a tragedy, the second time as a farce. But I wonder: What’s farcical about genocide?
While official Washington throw wild-eyed glances from the polls to the exit, Bill Roggio talks of facts on the ground.
We all get what we deserve.
Cap’n,
We live in a Constitutional Republic in which we, the people, elect others to represent us at the Federal level. As I understand the Constitution, any Treaty, approved by the Senate (aka House of Lords) becomes law. Thus, any time we ignore our obligations under a Treaty, we break our law. Cambodia and Vietnam fell because the Senate (the same Legislative body that approves Treaties) basically told our allies
‘Our troops are more than willing to stay and fight, but we think our money is better spent elsewhere.’ So we took our ball and went home and, as has been said elsewhere, ‘The rest is history.’
I cannot understand how the people we elect to represent us in Congress can willfully ignore the body of law backing our Treaties. Reprehensible is the most favorable term I could use.
Cambodia fell to the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot. The end result was the Killing Fields. Vietnam to Uncle Ho and his merry band of pillagers. Now Congress, ready to repeat their same mistake, is poised to let Iraq fall to an even more barbaric enemy.
I wonder – can Congress be arrested, en masse, for breaking the law?
If not that, can we re-activate Lord Kerry’s and Baron Murtha’s service status and have a Courts Martial?
Gee Lex. Who should I believe? You or John FN Kerry:
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/07/john-kerry—th.html
Not a trick question.
So I reckon we (us) are down to that 25% who support the war effort. Plus, we’re a part, or in my case were a part, of that 1% of the American population who make up the US military in recent times.
In my way of thinking we’re just Pack Plus over the Sheeple! 1 of 5! Which means we’re smarter, faster, funnier and better looking. Arrogant? Don’t you know it.
So as the American people have given up on the troops, I give up on them. Further it must suck to be them.
b2
I’ll see your Marx, and raise you an Eastwood. “Deserve’s got nothing to do with it.”
It’s ironic to me that the venerable Dr. Kissinger would display such personal compassion and empathy, given his actions circa 1972. But one’s memoirs are certainly the place to redefine yourself for posterity, I suppose.
The pullout and abandonment of South Vietnam had already been determined by Nixon and Kissinger by means of “Vietnamization.” The only question was the timetable.
Well knowing the likely horrendous consequences of a US pullout, Kissinger adopted the “decent-interval ” solution. The two years “decent interval” following the Paris Peace Accords allowed the US to distance itself from the obvious, eventual aftermath of our pullout.
In October of 1972, Kissinger said, “Peace was at hand.” He had reached an unfortunate and concessionary agreement with the North Vietnamese. But South Vietnamese president Thieu vehemently objected – and rightly so. The agreement would allow NVA troops remaining in the south, among other things. The subsequent “B-52 Christmas Raids” were intended more for influencing Thieu to accept the concessionary agreement than to force the North Vietnamese. Eventually, the peace treaty (with the same concessions as in the October agreement that the North had already agreed to) was signed and the long pullout ended, allowing Nixon and Kissinger to get on with their Chinese rapprochement.
As Kissinger’s then assistant, John Negroponte said: “We bombed North Vietnam into accepting our concession.”
While Kissinger seems to finally care in his memoir, he certainly didn’t act like he did at the time. Quite the opposite.