Isn't that Strange?

Robert Strange McNamara and Walter Cronkite died within two weeks of each other.  Both of them were liberal icons who were defined by Vietnam...and in retrospect, both of them got it completely wrong.

McNamara's sins are well known...the smartest man in the room--a man who could command every statistic, memorize every chart and win every argument, yet who could fire bomb civilians in World War II and then escalate troop levels to over 500,000 in Vietnam.  I urge you to watch "The Fog of War" in which McNamara concedes that he would have been tried as a war criminal if WWII had gone the other way.  Or read his autobiography "In Retrospect" in which he concedes that he got Vietnam so wrong.

Then Cronkite who famously declared the Vietnam war unwinnable--right after the massive American victory at Tet.  I recently finished Stanley Karnow's Pulitzer Prize winning History of Vietnam and Karnow interviewed Viet Cong generals about Tet and they all concured that it had been a military disaster.  They had the advantage of fighting guerilla tactics in the jungle and decided on a massive conventional strike in the cities...only to be wiped out. 

However, their defeat was salvaged when the American media--led by Cronkite--declared that Tet was a disaster...for the Americans, and that the war was "unwinnable."

Fortunately the days when CBS News can dictate the agenda and the world would look to one man for its news are long gone.  But the legacy remains.  Cronkite and McNamara...how many lives were lost from their hubris?  The world  will never know...but add up Dresden and the killing fields of Cambodia and you will get to millions.

Maybe ASU should name a building after him or something.

Post Script:  For a full accounting of the amazing story of how badly the US media botched the coverage of the Tet offensive, read Big Story by Peter Braestrup.

Comments

[Editor]

Wow. Blaming Cronkite for the Killing Fields is a new low.

The Cambodian genocide can be laid directly on the doorstep of Nixon and Kissinger who decided to expand the war into Cambodia to go after North Vietnamese and Viet Cong supply bases in Cambodia just over the Vietnamese border. Once we started bombing those bases, we quickly increased the size and scope of the bombings until eventually virtually all of Cambodia was bombed.

Then we supported the coup against Prince Norodom Sihanouk that installed Gen Lon Nol, a remarkably corrupt army general. The bombing and coup radicalized the people in the countryside which fed into the Khmer Rouge. (Some would say we organized the coup.)

Tet was a military disaster for the NVA/VC forces and a PR disaster for the US. But to suggest that the "liberal" media is responsible for the carnage that followed shows you have the same hubris you accuse Cronkite of having.

The press made a lot of mistakes in both Vietnam and Cambodia. But responsible for the "Killing Fields?" No way.

[todd]

Greg's criticism of Cronkite would perhaps be valid if Cronkite had come back from Vietnam "OMG! WE LOST TET. WE CAN"T WIN!". Of course, that is not what Cronkite said. In fact in his statement (https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/Cronkite_1968.html) he starts off saying he doesn't know who won Tet but it was largely not the point. The point was that after seeing what was actually happening in Vietnam and speaking with people there he concluded that the US was likely "mired in stalemate" but the coming months would reveal the truth. In fact the US remained mired in stalemate and proved the truth of Cronkite's prognosis.

Editor does a good job of debunking the claim that Cronkite had some responsibility for the Cambodian killing fields. I would just add that not only were the carpet bombing of Cambodia a major factor but it is important to realize that this action was illegal and in direct violation of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution.

I would certainly suggest people watch "Fog of War" to see how smart people can justify unimaginable crimes. I would then follow it up with reading Jane Mayer's "The Dark Side" for a more modern example of how highly intelligent people, this time in the Bush administration, can foolishly justify ignoring laws, congressional resolutions and international treaties all with highly detrimental results to the country.

[vet66]

Walter Cronkite was the most responsible for ushering the media version of the Trojan Horse into journalism. He perverted his ethics, morality, and virtue as the "most trusted name in journalism" pimping his reputation for agenda driven reporting. He ranks next to the ignominious Jane Fonda sitting on the AA gun in Hanoi during the same period. One of his acolytes, Dan Rather, is an example of what his perfidy accomplished in the 4th estate.

As for the Khmer Rouge and Sihanouk, they were both responsible for their own killing fields. Both terrorized the Cambodian countryside in a virtual killing homage to Russia's Joe Stalin.

The Russians were assisting the Chinese who were assisting the NVA to confront South Viet Nam in standing up to Communism backed by the Americans. The French were there first fighting the ChiComs but lost their battle at Dien bin Phu. Enter the U.S.

The truly obtuse still think the fight against Communism, Jihadism/radical Islam, is a natural response to evil U.S. hegemony and the Monroe Doctrine. Nothing could be further from the truth unless one is a serial U.S. apologist. The U.S. is currently the only bastion of true freedom of choice in a world populated by tyrants and autocrats hell-bent on maintaining regime survival by terrorizing their subjects with death, rape, and mayhem.

Cronkite is responsible for turning public opinion against our great military victory during Tet. The cowardly congress and administration that abandoned our ally, South Viet Nam for political expediency provided the fait accompli. Millions then died in Southeast Asia.

Harold and Editor are ignorant of the facts and show their inexperience by denying the responsibility of the press in the Killing Fields. The press laid the groundwork for the Killing Fields then perpetuated the lie through agenda reporting that downplayed the Boat People, Killing Fields, and brutal dictators dancing to the tune of their Chinese and Russian masters.

Cronkite participated in Market Garden during WWII. He lost his way journalistically and as a human being in the ensuing years. He apparently forgot the feeling of helplessness children of the age felt while cowering under their school desks and building fall-out shelters in the back yard. As a child I remember gazing out the window from the classroom wondering if the Russians were going to choose that day to nuke us.

That would have been the ultimate "Killing Field." Currently, if Harold and the editor think Obama has cowed the nuke seeking Iranians, they are dreaming. Iran is well on it's way to consolidate anti-American sentiment through Hugo Chavez, Hizballah, et al, to take advantage of the very weakness Cronkite inspired. BHO is now aware that his sweet talk and luminous smile does not impress those who would incinerate us once again. Time to wake up, ladies and gentlemen.

When we spend more time celebrating the likes of Michael Jackson and Cronkite instead of the passing of true American Patriots, the future doesn't look rosy. Darrell "Shifty" Powers of Easy Company fame passed away during this same period. No mention of him in the press. That speaks volumes to the rich and corrupt Iranian mullahs who increasingly fail to see us as an existential threat to their rule.

[Dave K.]

Well said, vet66!

[Patrick]

Crazy talk. Cronkite was a great man and all this stuff about Vietnam being winnable without the media is conservative revisionist fantasy...it also underscores why we got stuck in Iraq as conservatives steadfastly refuse to learn the lessons of Vietnam -- so we keep fighting it over and over again whenever they are in power.

[Jay]

You've been tap-dancing metaphorically on the graves of journalists for a long time - now you're literally doing it. That must thrill you to no end!

[The Klute]

(breaking a promise to myself)

Boy, Greg, if you're in the camp that thinks Dresden was a war crime, you must really have something to say about Hiroshima and Nagaski.

[KookyKon]

It wuz Cronkite and them DFH's what cost us the war in Nam.

[vet66]

Some here speak for the spoiled narcissists who violate the fundmental requirement that obligates a free society to continue enjoying that happy state of freedom and honor. They fail to define the enemy then double-down on that failing by biting the hand that provides them the opportunity to pursue their philosopical and moral cowardice.

They and Cronkite deserve each other. As for McNamara, he understood that reliance on air power would not win the war. The Israelis relearned that lesson in their last conflict with Hezbollah. But then what makes our country weak is pandering to people like these who cry about regrettable body counts and collateral damage then pimp the photos of returning caskets containing our warriors. But that is a self-fulfilling prophecy on the road to being mired down and defeated which is precisely the goal of socialists , and including Cronkite.

There is no honor in that except the honor earned by those who walk the battlements to keep cowards safe in their world of delusion. Cronkite lost his way with his acolytes dutifully following, lemming like, to the precipice. A pity!

[The Klute]

How very "Sparta" of you, vet66.

[RonB]

"Conservative revisionist fantasy?" Now that's a new one. Whenever the libs are losing an argument, they either go ad hominem, try to change the debate by changing the definition of words, or simply make things up. Seldom can you ever have a legitimate debate with a lib. Cronkite changed the war with his wimpy leftist visit to Southeast Asia, helping to usher in the disasters that followed. His misguided assessment of Tet was the beginning of the end. And he truly laid down the foundation for today's advocacy reporting (it is not journalism). It was moving when he teared up when JFK was killed; but sickening when he cried when HHH lost.

[Commander in Chief]

This is conservative revisionist fantasy bullshit in its worst form. Blaming Walter Cronkite for the killing fields of Cambodia?

What about Pol Pot? Ieng Sary, Ta Mok? Duch, who's on trial right now in Phnom Penh? They aren't to blame? Do Mr. Patterson and the right wing revisionist crowd even know who these people are or were? They killed 1.7 million of their own countrymen. Walter Cronkite is blamed for this, the names of the actual killers are not mentioned. Unreal.

Nixon and Kissinger? All they did was secretly carpet bomb a neutral country. They meddled in Cambodian politics, installed a hopelessly weak and inept puppet governemnt, then abandoned it to the Khmer Rougue. No blame there?

Ronald Reagan? Reagan didn't like the Vietnamese backed regime that took power in Phnom Pehn after the Khmer Rougue were ousted in 1979. He refused to recognize it and continued to support Pol Pot and the Khmer Rougue as the rightful rulers of Cambodia. No blame there, no, none at all. Just support for some of the worst mass murderers in history .

Like most revisionist crap, there's a small grain of truth to Mr. Patterson's post. Tet was a miltary defeat for the Vietnamese communists. It's completely wrong to translate that into any kind of victory for the American side.

General Westmoreland and his campaign of deceit and propaganda suffered an even worse defeat. Westmoreland had been lying about causualty figures. He'd been telling LBJ, the Congress, and the American people that everything was under control, we were winning the war, we were about to turn the corner, there was a light at the end of the tunnel. My favorite phrase of the propaganda campaign was "the mopping up phase." Westmoreland actually convinced people were we close enough to victory that we'd soon enter a phase of mopping up what little remained of our defeated enemy.

If you are not aware, in the Tet offensive every major city, nearly every provincial capital, and every important military base came under attack simulataneously. Hardly the actions of a defeated enemy about to be mopped up. Cronkite's reaction to Tet was appropriate. We're supposed to have this war almost won. What the hell is going on here?

All that remained of South Vietnam after Tet was a few islands held by American forces. The government of South Vietnam and its military collapsed completely. The ancient capital of Hue was captured. It had to be destroyed one block at a time in order to be recaptured, grievously damaging the scared Imperial Palace in the process. We had to destroy South Vietnam to save it. Hardly a "winnable" situation.

Thousands and thousands of Vietnamese civilians saw their homes and villages destroyed. As was our policy, the Americans did little to nothing to help them. They were left to the mercy of the South Vietnamese government, who showed more interest in robbing them than helping them.

A defeat for the Vietnamese communists? Sure. A victory for our side? No way. 543 American soldiers died in the first week of Tet, 2500 were wounded. 730 Americans died at Khe Sahn, the top of a hill in the middle of nowhere, in a diversionary attack. Some victory.

Vietnam was never winnable. If you wish to place blame, Westmoreland, LBJ, McNamara, Nixon, and Kissinger are good choices. For the Killing Fields, Pol Pot, Ta Mok and Duch must bear responsibiltiy. Not Walter Cronkite.

If you want to read better history, try Neil Sheehan's Pulitzer Prize winning "A Bright Shining Lie." Try "Sideshow" and "The Quality of Mercy" by William Shawcross. Real history, not revisionist bullshit.

[Dave K.]

CIC:

There is plenty of blame to go around for the debacle in SE Asia. If you want to get a real sense of history, you'll need to study more than just one side of it.

Try talking to a few folks who left something there, to begin with. Then you can move on to books.

Revisionism is in the eye of the beholder ...

[ron]

Cronkite made his comments on February 28, 1968. The final day of the Vietnam war was April 30, 1975. According to my math, the US military and politicians had 7 years and 60 days to prove Cronkite wrong.

[RonB]

Were any of you Cronkite-apologists alive during the Vietnam War? Reading your tripe about his comments not having any impact on the outcome of the SE Asia conflict is plain silliness. Did Uncle Walter pull the trigger? Of course not, but his and the comments of other libs paved the public relations road for the U.S. failures in Vietnam. Yes, LBJ, McNamara, Ford and others (and obviously the direct killers themselves) are mostly to blame. But do not discount the impact on public opinion that Cronkite's "reporting" had on the outcome.

[Editor]

You can't keep blaming the messenger.

If Cronkite and the "liberal" media lost the war in Vietnam who can the Soviets blame for losing Afghanistan? They had no critical press reporting on their mistakes or quagmire.

Or the French in Algeria and Vietnam? Their press wasn't that critical.

Wars like this are lost because they are notoriously difficult to fight. In our case, we went into Vietnam unprepared to fight a long war of attrition with no clear lines or fronts. We were backing a corrupt ally whose leaders and most of the military commanders were most interested in lining their own pockets than defending their nation state.

In the end, we contributed to the corruption and the destruction of a culture.

Vietnam wasn't ours to win, we never should have been there. As Santayana said, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

[RonB]

Ah, yes, the old "don't shoot the messenger" ploy. I would buy that argument, but Cronkite and the rest of the media are not just messengers; they are opinion makers. (UPS and FedEx are "messengers.") The media control the message, at least they certainly did in the '60's and '70's prior to the "new media" of today--thank heaven.