thinkprogress.org — Today, Giuliani said, "Have you ever heard of that in a history of war? ... Whether you’re for the war or against it, you would never have an army retreat on a six- month, one-year, 18-month schedule explaining, We’ll reduce the forces by 20,000, then by 30,000, then by 50,000." But in 1969, President Nixon announced just that.
Jul 6, 2007 View in Crawl 4
habemusJul 7, 2007
He was exactly right in what he said. He criticized the announced withdrawal in Vietnam by saying such a strategy was crazy (if applied to Iraq or any other reconstruction effort) and would lead to the enemy just waiting until the forces were weak enough to be unable to resist an attack. THAT'S EXACTLY THEN WHAT HAPPENED IN VIETNAM. He is right. He phrased it like this parallel example: "Have you even heard of a President being so stupid as to have sex with an unpaid intern in the Oval Office? It makes no sense, does it?" It doesn't mean it didn't happen -- it means he is saying it would be stupid to have done so (and it was). And this "you would never have an army retreat on a six- month, one-year, 18-month schedule " means **not** never has an army retreated on a six-month, one-year, 18-month schedule, but that such a time-table strategy is a recipe for disaster. He then drives it home (which the illiterate at Think Progress and Digg missed) by saying that such a strategy would allow the enemy to "figure out when the forces are depleted enough" to attack with impunity. Repeating: WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENED in Vietnam. He is more right than you realize.
Closed AccountJul 7, 2007
And so the ridiculous schism begins, proving that atheism is just as stupid as all other religions.Digg me down.
rojahonJul 7, 2007
It's not our responsibility nor can we afford to police the world.
macenvyJul 8, 2007
Not to mention that Germany started that whole mess ... Iraq didn't do s**t, unless you're a White House intelligence analyst.But to be one of those, you have to go to Liberty U, I've heard.
vascabrutaJul 8, 2007
We lost that war didn't we? Maybe it was the gradual withdrawal?<a class="user" href="http://politicalrogue.com">http://politicalrogue.com</a>
woknbluesJul 8, 2007
OK Guiliani, you cleaned up New York City. but let me tell you something. You are a political whore who can claim that the best thing that ever happened to him was 9/11. Everything is about 9/11 to you, and I am sick and tired of it. You scare the living s**t out of me, and though I hate Hillary, I just might vote for her if you are on the republican ticket, you frikken scary nutjob. you are the embodiment of just totally f'ed up whackjobs pandering to an extreme point of view that supports the suppression of all of the freedoms that Americans have. I hope RP tears ya' a new one again, you selective listening, type a fear mongering freak. thank you.
opiniastrousJul 8, 2007
Funny how everyone who reads 'The Art of War' suddenly thinks they're a brilliant strategist, even if they read it when they were 11. Everyone here is calling Giuliani an idiot because of the fact he seems unaware of the withdrawal schedule for Vietnam. Granted, it does seem pretty ignorant. However, I think the point he is actually making is very sensible. What sense is there in releasing a schedule for withdrawal?! It only allows the enemy to very easily shape their operations around your own; to wait until an attack has the most chance of success; to hold off a campaign until resistance is minimal, when otherwise it might have been committed earlier and defeated... The comparison to Vietnam is being made. Well perhaps you should actually consider that second quote of Sun Tzu's a little more, not least because it refers to a conventional battle, and not an insurgency. Nevertheless, if you want to apply it to Giuliani's statement, think about what happened in Vietnam when a schedule for withdrawal was made. Has everyone forgotten that famous photo of the helicopter on top of the American embassy in Saigon, showing US personnel fleeing the country as the enemy 'stormed the gates', entering the city they later renamed Ho Chi Minh City? The Vietnamese were not stupid. They engineered their operations around the US withdrawal schedule, and enjoyed great success because of it. Neither are the insurgents in Iraq. They too, will engineer their operations around a US withdrawal schedule. In case you want to digg me down by the way, note that I'm not getting political, I'm actually talking about this purely from a military perspective.On another note, I've got a problem with what ThinkProgress did in this article. I'm a big believer in using reason to ascertain the truth, rather than using tricks to 'win' an argument. In this article TP (and many of the people here on Digg) used the 'red herring' logical fallacy, amongst others.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_fallacy">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_fallacy</a>TP effectively sidestepped Giuliani's actual argument and replied to a distraction of sorts (his apparent ignorance or forgetfulness of the Vietnam war) that was very easy to beat up and make him look stupid, which again, is just not the same as addressing his actual point. I don't care if you still disagree with his conclusion, but I think that if you want a rational political debate in your country, then you should keep from using cheap tricks (and that goes for everyone).PS: If you really have forgotten the fall of Saigon, here's a link:<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Saigon">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Saigon</a>
freakk123Jul 9, 2007
I just can't understand how he could get elected though, the man has no f**king platform other than two words: Nine Eleven. He was a decent mayor his first term, and s**tty his second, and yet people think he's fit to be President! Honestly, something is terribly, terribly wrong with America. If that wasn't apparent already, the fact that a man who clearly wasn't great with the economy (look at the NY economy when Giuliani left office), with absolutely no experience in foreign policy and no experience in politics above a f**king mayoral level is probably THE front runner for the republican nomination for president, cements the fact in my mind that we are just f**ked. Keith Olbermann puts it very nicely:<a class="user" href="http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/25/olbermanns-special-comment-on-giulianis-fearmongering-how-dare-you-sir/">http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/25/olbermanns-special-comment-on-giulianis-fearmongering-how-dare-you-sir/</a> [/rant] Anyway, to learn what a f**kass is, watch Donnie Darko. Fantastic movie.
bratpack8Jul 9, 2007
Rudy makes Bush look like Einstein. And that is scary!
opticwindFeb 22, 2009
He'll probably argue that it wasn't actually a war, it was a conflict. Technically he's right but...still...