My Lai by Olson and Roberts - Essay Example

My Lai Massacre Introduction Napoleon had sweet dreams of conquering Europe and in the last years of captivity he lamented, “Brute force has never attained anything durable.” This evergreen remark was seconded by Adolph Hitler before he committed suicide. He bemoaned, “Brutal force has not won anything durable.” Yet, war-monger politicians and military generals are not willing to learn lessons and take recourse to brutal force to attain their objectives. The happenings in My Lai would make Napoleon and Hitler shift in their graves. James S. Olson is a Distinguished Professor of History at Sam Houston State University, who specializes in Vietnam history and Randy Roberts, Professor of history at Purdue University, is eminently suited to write about what happened in My Lai. Many thousands have died in the Vietnam War, from both sides—America and Vietcong, but what happened on March 16, 1968, at My Lai continues to haunt all those concerned with the study of Vietnam War. America dealt a crushing blow to principles of fighting a war, virtue and human values as professed by Americans. The researched writings of the authors are original, who have used unpublished testimony, eyewitnesses’ accounts of the investigators, those who made special efforts to cover-up, to save the ranks and honor of those involved and American prestige as a whole. Soldiers too are human beings first and men of compassion. American soldiers, no doubt, arrived at Vietnam to fight a war, not to commit brutalities of the scale of My Lai. The authors write about the observations of one such American soldier on arrival on the shores at Vietnam, “We were at the fringes of a bay that was green and sparkling in the sunlight. Beyond the leaping jade plates of the sea was an overhand of cliffs and the sight of a valley so large it contained sun, smoke, rain, and cloud—all at once—independent quantities of color. I had been unprepared for this beauty; it surprised and humbled me….” (6) But soldiers are but spikes in the giant military wheel. The “preamble” to the massacre reads thus, as described by the authors. “The order that was given was to kill everyone in the village. Someone asked if that meant women and children. And the order was: everyone in the village….It was quite clear that no one was to be spared in that village” (20). One can see each syllable of this order was the harbinger of the impending massacre. A disciplined soldier had no other alternative but to obey the order and be a part of the massacre. I entirely agree with the observations and findings of the authors that what happened in My Lai was a blunder. Not a military action but the massacre of the innocents. Majority of those killed were civilians, estimated some 400-500. The public, policymakers and anti-war movement activists were aware that they were being briefed with doses of fiction, as part of the cover-up operations. But the findings of the authors are on unassailable grounds and they have tendered 68 primary documents and have relied upon General Peer’s inquiry findings and they have chronicled the events systematically from the pre-operations details, the actual operation and the developments subsequent to the massacre. Black and white photos add the further credential to the report. Without the doubt, the soldiers were in an agitated state of mind, but that doesn't provide one license to shoot at the defenseless men, women, and children at will merely on the suspicion that they were Viet-Cong supporters. My Lai is a hamlet, 335 miles northeast of Saigon, supposed to be a Viet-Cong dominated territory. The early morning action of about 70 infantrymen which resulted in the total destruction of the villagers, their residences, and the livestock—can it be termed as military warfare? The Charlie Company of the 11th Brigade, American Division, landed in the village with the express intent to kill. The Officers had their own reasons, and they considered it as a retaliatory action. Firstly the area was a stronghold of Viet Cong. Many of this company had paid with their lives or maimed of late. But can revenge go that far? Lt. Calley and his troops blazed their guns to enter the village with practically no resistance. Old men were stabbed with the bayonet, women and children were gunned down, and a girl was raped before being killed. A number of villagers were ordered to reach a ditch, only to be mowed down with a burst of gunfire. Right thinking people across the world shuddered at the happenings at My Lai. Military and political authorities at Washington initiated investigations into the matter. Calley was charged with murder and in November 1969 journalist Seymour Hersh published a detailed account of his conversation with a Vietnam veteran, Ron Ridenhour, and the story received world-wide publicity. What I resent is the calculated efforts by the American authorities to cover up this grave incident. This can be termed as the second massacre. At the trial, Calley tried to pass the buck, alleging that he was ordered by Captain Ernest Medina to kill all in the village of My Lai. The truth surfaced ultimately, the motives were established that everything was planned, and the killings were proved to be deliberate cold-blooded murders. But the army authorities were reluctant to take quick punitive action and were involved in procedural hassles. Calley and his supporters took a firm plea that they were following the orders and in that highly Viet Cong infested area they had two choices—either to shoot or to get shot! When the alarming news was reported in the press with facts, figures and photographs, the political and army brass had to act and I believe, in the end, they did the right thing. The honor of the military establishment of America was at stake. A section of the American people were always against the war in Vietnam. The authors write, “…..the army filed war crimes and obstruction of justice charges against two generals, four full colonels, four lieutenant colonels, four majors, six captains and eight lieutenants.”(p.24) Conclusion In fine, it was murder in the name of war. Not all the soldiers did it willingly; some of them refused to get involved in blatant killings of the civilians. It was not a war situation—no questions about it---it was just revenge killings for the casualties suffered by the American army unit, in the recent past. Army authorities failed in their duty to render medical facilities to the injured, for their agenda was to kill one and all. It surmised that the Viet Kong had fled the village the night before the attack; obviously, their intelligence network was smarter than the American plans to attack. When My Lai massacre was brought to light, public perception about the Vietnam War changed much, with none to appreciate the atrocities committed by the American Army. The action was comparable to what Nazis did during the II World War. It was the genocide of the innocents. The actions of Charlie Company of the 11th Infantry Brigade, have brought permanent disgrace to the American Army and no investigation, no inquiry, no court-marshal would be able to recoup what is lost forever—compassion and human values! Works Cited Olson, James S and Roberts, Randy. My Lai: A Brief History with Documents (Bedford Series in History & Culture). Bedford/St. Martin's; 1998.First Edition Read More