McNamara's Mea culpa.

[harryopal1]

In 1995 the former US Secretary of Defence, Robert McNamara wrote a book,"In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam". In summary he said, “We were wrong, terribly wrong.” He concluded with a list of 11 lessons which America ought consider before entering into conflict.

Since the Vietnam war ended the US has been involved in 15 conflicts. It seems many policy makers in America have not read McNamara's book or noted his lessons.

1. We misjudged the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries
   American leaders misunderstood the motives of North Vietnam, China, and the Soviet Union and exaggerated the threat they posed.
2. We viewed the situation through our own cultural lens
   U.S. policymakers assumed others shared American political values and motivations, which led to serious misinterpretations.
3. We underestimated the power of nationalism
   Vietnamese nationalism was a far stronger motivating force than ideological communism.
4. We were ignorant of the country’s history, culture, and politics
   American leaders lacked deep understanding of Vietnam and the region.
5. We underestimated the limits of military power
   Modern technology and superior military force cannot easily defeat determined insurgent movements.
6. We failed to adapt our tactics to the nature of the conflict
   U.S. strategy did not properly adjust to guerrilla warfare and political struggle.
7. We failed to win the “hearts and minds” of the population
   Military actions often alienated the very people whose support was necessary.
8. We did not fully debate or challenge our assumptions
   The decision-making system discouraged open disagreement and rigorous questioning.
9. We did not adequately explain the war to the American public
   Public understanding and support were not honestly or clearly addressed.
10. We did not recognize that the U.S. cannot shape every outcome in the world
    Sometimes policymakers must accept “an imperfect and untidy world.”
11. We failed to organize government decision-making effectively
    The executive branch lacked structures that ensured thorough analysis and debate of complex military and political decisions.

 

[centurion]

Since the Vietnam war ended the US has been involved in 15 conflicts. It seems many policy makers in America have not read McNamara's book or noted his lessons.

Conflict is not always a bad thing.

In the last 80 years Vietnam was involved in 5 conflicts and won all of them.

 

[Balifrog]

He forgot reason #1, Americans still think they are great cowboys...
Hence they still carry arms going to the supermarket !

 

[Pak Tani]

Any mention of why Robert McNamara failed to properly investigate the USS Liberty incident, an Israeli attack on a US ship (34 american crew members were killed and 171 wounded)?

 

[harryopal1]

Any mention of why Robert McNamara failed to properly investigate the USS Liberty incident, an Israeli attack on a US ship (34 american crew members were killed and 171 wounded)?

If you are really interested there is a very detailed analysis of that debacle with Wikpedia.

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There were many who accepted that the attack was a case of mistaken identity and there is view that suggests it was deliberate to prevent the US knowing about planning for an attack on the Golan Heights and another view that Liberty was jamming Israeli communications.

McNamara is seen to have pressed for enquiry results to agree that the attack was accidental. Henry Kissinger was then just an advisor to government before being appointed as Secretary of State and National Security advisor but his ideas about realpolitik reflected thinking that allowed decisions based on practical rather than moral considerations. If indeed the attack were deliberate one could well imagine that, with the deed done, McNamara's decision would have reflected a desire to maintain Israeli relations and he enaged in realpolitik.

 

[Pak Tani]

If you are really interested there is a very detailed analysis of that debacle with Wikpedia.

Yes, I've seen a couple of documentaries about it. It is a fascinating story.

There were many who accepted that the attack was a case of mistaken identity and there is view that suggests it was deliberate to prevent the US knowing about planning for an attack on the Golan Heights and another view that Liberty was jamming Israeli communications.

The fact that the idea persists that this could have been an accident is remarkable, to say the least. The incident happened on a clear day, USS Liberty was flying a large American flag and its hull number was clearly visible. Before the attack Israeli reconnaissance airplanes had been circling the ship several times. The attack lasted up to 80 minutes and involved multiple waves of Israeli jets and three torpedo boats (whose hull markings were smaller than the USS Liberty's but could be read by sailors with the naked eye). During the attack the USS Liberty's radios were jammed which suggests a deliberate effort to isolate the ship form the sixth fleet nearby. Etc. etc.

McNamara is seen to have pressed for enquiry results to agree that the attack was accidental.

There has never been a congressional investigation. The primary US Navy Court of inquiry took 8 days. Survivors' calls for hearings were blocked. Despite being in international waters, some US representatives blamed the navy for being near a war zone. It looks like the whole incident was swept under the rug as quickly as possible. Why, mr McNamara?
Almost as if there was a lobby who wanted to have this case shut down.