Started By
Message
locked post

30 Years Ago: When Reagan Cut and Run

Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:20 am
Posted by trackfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
19691 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:20 am
LINK
quote:

Thirty years ago this week, President Ronald Reagan made perhaps the most purposeful and consequential foreign-policy decision of his presidency. Though he never said so explicitly, he ended America's military commitment to a strategic mistake that was peripheral to America's interests. Three-and-a-half months after the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. military personnel -- and after repeatedly pledging not to do so -- Reagan ordered the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Lebanon. As Gen. Colin Powell later aptly summarized this military misadventure: "Beirut wasn't sensible and it never did serve a purpose. It was goofy from the beginning."

What was particularly remarkable about Reagan's bold decision was its rarity. Presidents often authorize using force or deploying troops to achieve some discrete set of political and military objectives. When they prove incapable of doing so with the initial resources and political support, the mission can be scaled back in its scope, enlarged to achieve additional missions, or, the atypical choice, terminated. The latter option requires having the ability to recognize failure, and political courage to end a U.S. military commitment. In large part, it is a combined lack of strategic awareness and political courage that explains many U.S. military disasters. . . . . .


Yet, just three days later, on Feb. 7, Reagan ordered the Marines to "redeploy" to their ships offshore -- which was actually a full withdrawal achieved in three weeks. Although the Marine's mission in Lebanon was not clearly defined and, subsequently, not achieved, Reagan's tacit admission of failure and withdrawal of the Marines from Lebanon limited America's further involvement in foreign-policy disaster -- saving money, lives, and time. Many pundits later claimed wrongly that Reagan was erroneous, because Osama bin Laden contended that the withdrawal was a sign of U.S. weakness; as if America's strategic choices should be held hostage to how terrorists choose to describe them.

U.S. officials and policymakers often share a long tradition of refusing to acknowledge strategic errors, or to place specific blame on individuals responsible for their authorization and execution. Rather, the causes of defeat are assigned to anonymous sources like "the bureaucracy," "lack of public will," or maybe "Congress." When serving or retired officials are asked whether a war or military intervention was a mistake, they often reply: "That's for historians to decide." Even then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said this when asked if Iraq was "worth it" just before he retired: "[I]t really requires a historian's perspective in terms of what happens here in the long term."

But historians do not make future policy decisions; they study and assess previous ones. Sending Marines to Lebanon for such an imprecise and unachievable end-state was a tremendous mistake. Reagan's decision to tacitly admit that it was a U.S. foreign-policy failure, and to then undertake corrective actions, was an admirable trait rarely seen in poilcymakers or presidents.




Posted by lsuroadie
South LA
Member since Oct 2007
8399 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:21 am to
k
Posted by Choctaw
Pumpin' Sunshine
Member since Jul 2007
77774 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:22 am to
what's your point here?
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
51437 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:23 am to
you are actually complimenting Reagan? I don't believe it.
Posted by Tigah in the ATL
Atlanta
Member since Feb 2005
27539 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:23 am to
These colors don't run.
Posted by skinny domino
sebr
Member since Feb 2007
14341 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:26 am to
quote:

trackfan

this will not end well.
Posted by Ryne Sandberg
Team Am Mart
Member since Apr 2009
19368 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:28 am to
Thanks?
Posted by Manky
New Orleans
Member since Jul 2013
1145 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:28 am to
It really was the beginning of a new type of warfare.
What twisted me off was the denial of military decorations for those involved, the Reagan Admin was embarassed but it never was clear if it was the administration or the military. I know the people that were there or QRF got their decorations years later.
Posted by trackfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
19691 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:29 am to
quote:

you are actually complimenting Reagan? I don't believe it.

Why don't you? I've always been consistent and non-partisan when it comes to foreign policy, which is why I consider Bush 41 the best foreign policy President in my lifetime.
This post was edited on 2/10/14 at 10:52 am
Posted by CITWTT
baton rouge
Member since Sep 2005
31765 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:33 am to
The original purpose was as peace keepers in the civil war there. So are we to believe that with all of your wisdom about the Middle East it was senseless to have sent troops into Lebanon?
Posted by AlaTiger
America
Member since Aug 2006
21123 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:35 am to
Clinton did it with Somalia and Republicans blasted him for it.

I think it was a good move, although it would have been better to have gone in one more time in force and wiped out the elements in Mogadishu causing the trouble in a show of force before we left.
Posted by lsuroadie
South LA
Member since Oct 2007
8399 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:42 am to
quote:

I've always been consistent and non-partisan when it comes to politics



Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112517 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:43 am to
quote:

Clinton did it with Somalia and Republicans blasted him for it.

He should have been blasted. His cut and run from Somalia shocked the hell out of OBL who then became convinced that the US would not retaliate against terrorism. It caused 9-11 to happen.
Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
56561 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:45 am to
quote:

I've always been consistent and non-partisan when it comes to politics
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:48 am to
He didn't "cut and run", he merely re-deployed.

In order to counter the images of coffins of US Marines killed in Beirut, Reagan needed images of Marines hitting the beaches:



Literally two days after the Beirut bombing Reagan had marines on the beach on Grenada. So quickly, in fact, it was a fait accompli by the time Reagan had informed his closest ally, Margaret Thatcher, who had at first advised against it - until she realized it had already happened.
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:50 am to
quote:

His cut and run from Somalia shocked the hell out of OBL who then became convinced that the US would not retaliate against terrorism. It caused 9-11 to happen.


I've wondered if Somalia was GHWB's farewell "frick you" to Clinton. Bush landed the Marines to support humanitarian aid to Somalia and left Billy Jeff/ Les Aspin to handle the fallout.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112517 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:52 am to
Don't know but I remember being opposed to the humanitarian aid issued by Bush. Our military is not a pizza delivery service.
Posted by Jwho77
cyperspace
Member since Sep 2003
76679 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:52 am to
quote:

Clinton did it with Somalia and Republicans blasted him for it.

He should have been blasted. His cut and run from Somalia shocked the hell out of OBL who then became convinced that the US would not retaliate against terrorism. It caused 9-11 to happen.


Come on, man. Don't believe OBL thought for one second that the US would not retaliate from a big, successful terrorist attack on US soil like they planned and executed. In fact, that's what they wanted to do. Start a "war" to escalate the us versus them (USA/Israel) fight.
Posted by trackfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
19691 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:53 am to
quote:

I've always been consistent and non-partisan when it comes to politics

Oops. I meant foreign policy. Obviously I'm partisan in politics.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112517 posts
Posted on 2/10/14 at 10:57 am to
quote:

Come on, man. Don't believe OBL thought for one second that the US would not retaliate from a big, successful terrorist attack on US soil like they planned and executed. In fact, that's what they wanted to do. Start a "war" to escalate the us versus them (USA/Israel) fight.


No, OBL had no idea of the degree of Bush's response since he had no idea that Bush was not Clinton. He expected the US to go isolationist. Expecting all out war between the US/Israel v. Arabs is a moronic view and OBL was not a moron. The Arab states are not united and even if they were they would lose all out war.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram