Andrew Bacevich

Iraq and Vietnam


Andrew Bacevich, Professor of International Relations and History at Boston University and author of The New American Militarism, and The Long War: A New History of U.S. National Security Policy Since World War II, discusses the president’s comparison of Iraq to Vietnam, and some realistic ones.

MP3 here. (16:35)

Andrew J. Bacevich is professor of international relations at Boston University. A graduate of the U. S. Military Academy, he received his Ph. D. in American Diplomatic History from Princeton University. Before joining the faculty of Boston University in 1998, he taught at West Point and at Johns Hopkins University.

Dr. Bacevich is the editor of The Long War: A New History of US National Security Policy since World War II (2007). His previous books include American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U. S. Diplomacy (2002), The Imperial Tense: Problems and Prospects of American Empire (2003), and The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War (2005). His essays and reviews have appeared in a wide variety of scholarly and general interest publications including The Wilson Quarterly, The National Interest, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, The Nation, The American Conservative, and The New Republic . His op-eds have appeared in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today, among other newspapers.

8 thoughts on “Andrew Bacevich”

  1. When Professor Bacevich says he thinks the Army Generals will speak out is he taking into account the shift to Naval and Air operations that seem to comprise the major part of the administration’s plan to attack Iran?

    If this is the plan, couvert operations and forces not yet engaged in combat would provide the attack force. Would other high commanders speak up?

  2. The discussion of the sanitised Pro-US 1958 film of “The Quiet American” (which I haven’t seen) makes me wonder if Shrub and/or his speachwriters’ otherwise “unaccountable” appeals to the literary work were informed by the first movie version rather than familiarity with the book.

  3. great show. very informative. i liked the comment that the neocons can’t attack iran….but alas the neocons are lunatics and congress is bought and paid for. i hope he is right though.

  4. It is really disheartening to live among countrymen who have been raised to indeed be "seduced by war". The Honorable Dennis Kucinich is the only member of Congress who has proposed that there be a federal Department of Peace.

    1. Re: Dept of Peace.

      The US has departments of Labor, Environment, Mine Safey, Occupational Safety, etc. The president appoints its members who historically have done the bidding of those supposedly regulated. Environment protects the polluter, MSHA and OSHA protects the employer. An appointee to the Dept of Peace would do the bidding of the president. When this appointee would say, “There is no peaceful solution, war is necessary,” the peace movement will be co-opted. The non-engaged public will villify the peace movement saying the dept of peace has spoken. If I were Bush, I’d set up such a department immediately. The only way to get peace is to create a culture of peace. There are no quick fixes as I hope those who worked to elect democrats to congress last election learned. Further, Bush just appointed a war hawk to the US Institute of Peace

  5. Pingback: informed bidding

Comments are closed.