As you read develop a sense of the influence Robert McNamara had in world history and, in particular, the military action of the United States during World War II up through the end of Vietnam. We will focus on McNamara’s role as Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam war paying particular attention to how he presents his beliefs and also how he appears to view his own level responsibility.
Robert McNamara
The Fog of War is a 20th century fable, a story of an American dreamer who rose from humble origins to the heights of political power. Robert S. McNamara was both witness to and participant in many of the crucial events of the 20th century: the crippling Depression of the 1930s; the industrialization of the war years; the development of a different kind of warfare based on air power and the creation of a new American meritocracy. He was also an idealist who saw his dreams and ideals challenged by the role he played in history.
Although strictly speaking, neither a work of biography nor a work of history, The Fog of War has produced important, new biographical and historical material.
First, although there have been several book-length biographies of Robert S. McNamara and many books in which he is a principal figure, none have discussed the pivotal relationship between McNamara and General Curtis LeMay, the infamous U.S. General, and their involvement in the firebombing of 67 Japanese cities in 1945.
World War II is thought of as a just war. It is believed that the Allies fought on the side of good, and that what they did in their wartime effort was justified by that fact. What few people know is that before the United States dropped the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, LeMay’s B-29 bombers had already killed nearly 1 million Japanese civilians, including 100,000 in Tokyo on the night of March 10th, 1945.
McNamara raises deep moral questions about his role and, by implication, the entire Allied role in winning the war against Japan by any means necessary. He asks, “In order to win a war, is a nation justified in killing 100,000 civilians in one night?” “Would it be moral to not burn to death 100,000 Japanese civilians, but instead to lose hundreds of thousands of American lives in an invasion of Japan?”
Second, for many people who are familiar with the Cuban missile crisis from the movie Thirteen Days, The Fog of War tells a very different story. Here is a story not about how John or Bobby Kennedy saved the world, but a story of blind luck and the limits of rational judgment. A story of a world out of control, where a nuclear holocaust was averted by an obscure state department official who had the temerity to speak up to the President and to urge him to empathize with his adversary.
Third, The Fog of War is the first historical investigation to make extensive use of taped telephone conversations from the Oval Office of the White House between Johnson and McNamara. Much of what has been written about Robert S. McNamara rehashes a familiar story—that of a computer-like man, a technocrat, a hawk who, through his arrogance, blundered into Vietnam. However, the presidential recordings – the weight of the historical evidence itself – do not bear this out. Instead, a far more complex portrait of the man emerges—one who tried to serve two very different presidents: John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson.
We hear McNamara explaining to Kennedy the need to set a timetable for removing advisors from Vietnam; we hear Johnson (after Kennedy’s death) admonishing McNamara for his unwarranted optimism in giving such advice; we hear McNamara urging Johnson to put the breaks on the bombing of North Vietnam; but, in the end we hear McNamara endorsing the President’s wish to continue the war. - Errol Morris
This is directly relevant to Ethics as an area of knowledge and asks you to utilize Reason as a WoK effectively to justify the views you hold regarding these targets.
Beginning – 2:39 – 7:10
From Chapter 17 – 1:26:16 (30 min)
Then to 1:32:24 – to end (“I’d rather be damned if I don’t”)
What does McNamara want us to believe? Is he explaining history as he remembers it or telling us what we wants us to think? Can he tell the difference? Can you?
Our understanding of history can be as much about what is left out as what is included. Errol Morris has drawn the content of his interview with Robert McNamara from more than twenty hours of tape. What do you think might have been left on the cutting room floor? And what might never have been said? We can identify omissions but we can only speculate as to who made the choices and why. What do you think?
McNamara told the story about Norman Morrison, a Quaker who burned himself to death below McNamara’s office. Morrison’s wife issued the statement: “Human beings must stop killing other human beings.” McNamara said, “that’s a belief that I shared. I shared it then and I believe it even more strongly today.” Making the point that you need to do whatever killing was necessary but minimize it, McNamara said, “It’s a very, very difficult position for sensitive human beings to be in. Morrison was one of those. I think I was.” To what degree do you think McNamara’s actions are consistent with his espoused beliefs above that human beings should not kill other human beings and about himself as a pacifist?
Posted On: Wednesday, October 12th, 2011
Posted In: TOK
Subscribe: RSS 2.0
Comments: No Responses
Recent Comments