No one ever claimed you had to be a genius to be a US Senator...far from it. But the stupidity one hears sometimes coming from the mouths of some our supposedly “high ranking” and “senior” politicians is shocking. Take for instance the recent mumblings of Senator Lindsey Graham (R NC) who called for the invasion of Venezuela. (See vox.com “Lindsey Graham proposes invading Venezuela to oust Maduro”—E. Kleefeld, May 26, 2019.)
Graham supports an invasion because according to him it would check what he claims is “Cuban influence” in that dystopian, chaotic and mismanaged country. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, as well as a Fox News interview, Graham reprieved the President Reagan era invasion of Granada in1983 as a paradigm for an invasion of Venezuela, apparently unaware or ignoring the sad history of that episode and the last two decades of disastrous invasions and regime change embroglios in Iraq and Afghanistan The Granada invasion was nothing to be proud of or to emulate. Granada was bad policy in 1983 but is a good example of what could and often does go wrong with the thoughtless and casual misapplication of military might.
In October of 1983 Ronald Reagan, citing “threats posed to American nationals” from a political uprising in Grenada, sent a naval task force and thousands of soldiers to invade the tiny Caribbean island nation a green speck about the size of the combined Brooklyn and Queens Counties in NY City which is located about 100 miles north of the north coast of Venezuela.
Since 1979, Granada, under then Prime Minister Maurice Bishop, had been irritating Washington as it moved steadily toward a more and more left-leaning political stance. PM Bishop had even the temerity to develop close relations with Castro’s Cuba. But in 1983 Bishop was assassinated and a more extreme leftist— avowed Marxist, Bernard Cord—and later Hudson Austin-took over the government. These leaders moved Grenada further into the sphere of Communist Cuba. Protests and demonstrations (some say instigated by the CIA) erupted in the streets of the capital city of St. George.
Since 1979, Granada, under then Prime Minister Maurice Bishop, had been irritating Washington as it moved steadily toward a more and more left-leaning political stance. PM Bishop had even the temerity to develop close relations with Castro’s Cuba. But in 1983 Bishop was assassinated and a more extreme leftist— avowed Marxist, Bernard Cord—and later Hudson Austin-took over the government. These leaders moved Grenada further into the sphere of Communist Cuba. Protests and demonstrations (some say instigated by the CIA) erupted in the streets of the capital city of St. George.
President Reagan, using as an excuse the threat of harm coming to the nearly 1000 US citizens on the island, (most were medical students at one university) sent the invasion force. The eventual force of about 7,000 US Marines, (supported by a task force of one aircraft carrier, two destroyers, 3 frigates, dozens of helicopters, and 27, F14 Tomcat fighter jets) found themselves facing armed Grenadian troops as well as Cuban engineers who were on the island to rebuild the airport. These local forces, numbering about 1,200, opposed the Reagan armada with small arms, two armored cars and 12 Anti Aircraft guns. See: Wikipedia.com: Grenada Invasion.
Our US troops were successful, but due to poor planning and preparation (in the rush to invade the troops were had no maps of the island ) our overwhelming forces suffered 20 dead and over 100 wounded in a short few days. We also lost nine of our helicopters to ground fire. After the first days of combat President Reagan had to to send in about 4000 more troops to finally subdue the locals and oust the Grenadian People’s Revolutionary government. There is little argument that the US effort was hugely expensive for the benefits gained (what were they?) and should have elicited severe condemnation, but the Regan Administration characterized the costly (in blood, money and materiel) invasion as a “great victory” as well as a “roll back of communist” influence in the Caribbean. They got away with it too.
Our US troops were successful, but due to poor planning and preparation (in the rush to invade the troops were had no maps of the island ) our overwhelming forces suffered 20 dead and over 100 wounded in a short few days. We also lost nine of our helicopters to ground fire. After the first days of combat President Reagan had to to send in about 4000 more troops to finally subdue the locals and oust the Grenadian People’s Revolutionary government. There is little argument that the US effort was hugely expensive for the benefits gained (what were they?) and should have elicited severe condemnation, but the Regan Administration characterized the costly (in blood, money and materiel) invasion as a “great victory” as well as a “roll back of communist” influence in the Caribbean. They got away with it too.
Other Americans at the time were more skeptical of government motives, noting that the Grenada invasion seemed too much like a transparent and insidious means of deflecting public attention from the really tragic and disastrous events which had just occurred only a few days earlier in Lebanon— the 1983 Beirut Barracks bombing in which 241 US peacekeeper troops were brutally killed by a car bomb.
That is the sad, embarrassing history of the Grenada Invasion. Do we want to repeat that in multiples of perhaps thousands in Venezuela? Apparently Senator Graham thinks that’s OK.
Grenada is a tiny island of about 100 square miles with at the time, a population of about 91,000. Its small military comprised some 1,200 troops and a few armored cars and about a dozen antiaircraft guns.
Venezuela is a huge nation state of more that’s 350,000 square miles, much of it jungle and forested highlands. To envision its size think of an area equal to an area about that of all the New England and the Mid Atlantic States of the USA combined. Venezuela has a population of 30 million people or almost one-tenth of the USA, The national forces are comprised of a conscripted force claimed to have 320,000 members in the Army, Navy, Air Force, National Guard and National Militia. In 2008 an Armed Reserve was established which is claimed to total an additional 600,000 members. These trained forces are (as of 2008) well equipped with modern armaments such as ballistic missiles, surface-to-air missiles, attack helicopters, battle tanks, field artillery, rocket launchers, air defense systems.
The political situation in Venezuela is in one way similar to the USA...the government and the polity is strongly divided between poor residents of the countryside and favellas and the (formerly) wealthy denizens of the cities. Even today there are armed pro-government gangs called “collectivos” which attack any who demonstrate against the Maduro government. Such forces would not simply give up after a US military defeat—after an invasion—but would coalesce into powerful insurgents that would slink off into the jungles and highlands to become an insurgent force difficult and costly to suppress and irradICATE—if even possible.
The forces of Venezuela are no match for the USA. We would clearly win any war with Venezuela and any two or more of its allies. But at what cost? Why would we want to expend the effort, or spend the money or the blood? What benefits would there be to the USA?
And finally how would it end? With another twenty year Afghan-style war of attrition which would drain other trillions of dollars of our wealth? Of American forces tied-down fighting jungle based insurgents? Or with vast numbers of Venezuelan refugees streaming across our southern border?
Oh please Senator Graham—bite your tongue!
No comments:
Post a Comment