Demythologizing Generals

By: Dianne
Published On: 9/25/2007 8:47:25 AM

The Washington Post's Sunday review of David Halberstam's final book, The Coldest Winter, couldn't have come at a more appropriate time.  General Patraeus is called to testify at the much-anticipated September hearings on the status of the Iraq surge and the day following, he is challenged, on all sides, on the candor and accuracy of what he told us.  Instead of taking the ball and gaining control of the Iraq War discussion game, Senate Democrats participated in a vote to condemn an organization that criticized the General (disappointing many of us here on RK and on other progressive blogs).  Meanwhile reputable sources continue to set the public straight on just exactly what the facts were and are, despite what the General testified and what the Democrats failed to seize on -- the truth of Patraeus' testimony.

So to the book review.  The reviewer thinks that Halberstam's book can offer some insight, based on the changing views of the Korean War, in to our venture in Iraq.  And in looking at Korea through this book, it seems that Halberstam has Douglas MacArthur in his crosshairs. 

The reviewer, in his last sentence, brings us to the crux of what so many Americans continually fall victim to, mythologizing what may not deserve unquestioned respect.  He says: "But what his [Halberstam's] formidable indictment does end is the mythologizing of Douglas MacArthur."  And in this case, I think that the Republicans have succeeded in convincing the American public of the mythology of General Patraeus -- without error, without vice, without weakness, and now without oversight -- with their clever tactical move to take the heat off Patraeus with this phony vote.

Many historians have strong opinions and feelings about Douglas MacArthur's life and accomplishments.  And it's this examination of his history that validates that no one, not even a general, is so important as to be untouchable, that his action and words can not be examined, even critically.

From the book review --

As MacArthur continued to stretch his mandate and openly criticize a strategy intended to contain the war to Korea,  worried that his megalomania could have horrific consequences now that Stalin had the Bomb. But the mystique of MacArthur, who had been cosseted timidly by Washington for a decade, paralyzed the process. When his lapses had helped lose the Philippines after Pearl Harbor, he was 9,000 miles away and untouchable. In the dark months when the nation needed a hero, Gen. George C. Marshall, the army chief of staff, overcame his scorn and drafted an unearned Medal of Honor citation for the self-styled hero of Bataan, where MacArthur had spent all of two hours. The gesture was fitting for someone Halberstam characterizes as believing "that the truth was whatever he said it was at that moment."

While no one denies that the military and its general officers are the pinnacle of courage, bravery, and intelligence, with an incredible and invaluable knowledge of world, American, and military history, we must not be so blinded by this nor fearful of being considered unpatriotic, to not hesitate, even for a moment, in asking them hard questions and expecting accurate and honest answers.

Those they lead deserve no less.  The continuance of our democracy is dependent on it.

So now how is the surge going?  Here's some news to start off your day.

Comments