Will conservatives support our troops when they mutiny?

By Dennis Rahkonen
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Apr 19, 2007
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1987.shtml

U.S. soldiers’ tours of duty have been extended by three months in both Afghanistan and Iraq. In the latter country, this development plays out ominously against unprecedented levels of popular anti-Americanism, as evidenced by a huge rally targeting the occupation, recently held in Najaf, which united Shiites, Sunnis, and uniformed members of Iraq’s police and military.

It’s a recipe for disaster, in more ways than one, as past history demonstrates.

Those too young to remember the early ’70s are unaware of a remarkable phenomenon from that era.

During the latter stages of the Vietnam war, as Americans were still being sacrificed in a conflict that was both unequivocally wrong and hopelessly lost, U.S. rank-and-file troops engaged in open rebellion.

Downplayed by the government and major media as it was occurring, evidence of that rebellion has been expunged or whitewashed in official, revisionist histories of Vietnam.

But the truth manages to get through, sometimes in utterly damning fashion, such as the following, written in 1971 by Col. Robert Heinl in the Armed Forces Journal:

“Our army that now remains in Vietnam is in a state approaching collapse, with individual units avoiding or having refused combat, murdering their officers and noncommissioned officers, drug-ridden and dispirited, where not near-mutinous . . . [C]onditions [exist] among American forces in Vietnam that have only been exceeded in this century by . . . the collapse of the Tsarist armies in 1916 and 1917.”

Three circumstances finally brought the Vietnam debacle to an end.

First in importance was the fact that Vietnamese guerrillas and North Vietnam’s regular army prevailed against the American superpower.

Then there was the highly potent, domestic antiwar movement that routinely filled U.S. streets with militant protests while also engaging in student teach-ins, neighborhood organizing, voter registration, draft counseling, and other forms of pivotal defiance.

But it was the realization, so demoralizing to those who wished to continue the war, that “their” army was literally dissolving before astonished eyes that made withdrawal from Vietnam inevitable. A final congressional cutoff of war funding was anticlimactic. Johnny had already put down his gun.

Considering that George Bush’s Iraq folly represents equally as futile an effort to trump objective reality with stubborn, subjective will as was once attempted in Vietnam -- and also because his escalating, open-ended “surge” erects a human shooting gallery in which U.S. troops will be mercilessly picked off -- it’s only a matter of time before already severely eroded military morale in Iraq decisively breaks down.

Disobeying commands that would result in certain slaughter has already taken place.

One such incident happened in Ramadi. A squad from the Second Battalion, Fifth Marines was asked to duplicate a mission performed by another Marine squad that had been completely wiped out -- to take the same path, invite fire, and hopefully expose Iraqi insurgents to cover fire. Fearful of a second massacre, the chosen squad, to a man, refused to move out. At the last minute, an alternate mission was authorized, thereby avoiding possibly violent insubordination.

Significantly, it’s been reported that roughly half a dozen generals have indicated they’ll resign if Bush expands the Iraq war through an attack on Iran. This adds an entirely new dimension to the overall dynamic.

Our troops are being asked to accomplish the impossible, through now longer, repeated deployments. The psychological stress of facing a determined Iraqi insurrection that will continue until either the sun explodes or the last American is driven out is almost worse than the physical destruction Iraq’s resistance fighters relentlessly inflict.

Sooner or later, major refusal is bound to occur. When it does, will conservatives continue to support our troops, who -- at that juncture -- will need all the public backing they can possibly get?

Or will they condemn as “traitors” American parents’ precious sons and daughters who choose to turn around and say, “Enough of this murderous bullshit!” rather than march dutifully into an exploding death trap of Dick Cheney’s malicious making?

Let’s not forget that crass manipulation of emotions surrounding the Support Our Troops theme by right-wingers got Americans onboard for an illegal, immoral aggression in the first place.

Back before the war even began, after principled peace activists had already marched in great numbers to try to stop Bush’s impending travesty, conservatives countered with jingoistic rallies where opposing the coming disaster -- which would prove so devastating to our troops -- was falsely presented as betraying them.

Republicans “supported” our soldiers and Marines straight into graves, and into horrific survival absent arms, legs, and sanity.

That was the actual, abject betrayal!

As awful as it was, I’m afraid we’ll see it sordidly surpassed in the not too distant future as conservatives castigate service personnel who exhibit the wisdom, and enormous courage, to no longer fight in a rich man’s dirty war for oil.

Dennis Rahkonen of Superior, Wisconsin, has been writing for various progressive outlets since the ’60s. He can be reached at dennisr@cp.duluth.mn.us.