Mcnamara and the “Fog of War”

Rebekka Carter 11/15/2012 McNamara and the taint Of War approximatelytimes negotiation and peace is the only way to avoid catastrophe that could destroy us all. The first lesson of the Fog of War, that McNamara gave was to realise with your enemy. McNamara thought it was a must and that is was important to put ourselves into the enemys shoes. He discussed in the interview that later became a documentary, the possible serious consequences we could face as a nation if we didnt empathize with Cubans during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. We must strain to put ourselves inside their skin and brass at us through their eyes, just to understand the thoughts that lie behind their decisions and their actions, McNamara justified. If we could negotiate and settle, we might cease work something out to benefit both the U. S. , and the Soviet Union. During the Cuban missile Crisis, McNamara tried to persuade death chair Kennedy not to press on and invade Cuba. He could give the president advice because he was a member of the presidents cabinet. Robert McNamara was the Secretary of Defense in office. He persuaded him along with Tommy Thompson whom was the former U. S.Ambassador to Moscow. They gave them advice on two messages we received from the Soviet Union. McNamara described this as a weighty message and a soft message. The soft message give tongue to they would remove the missiles from Cuba as long as we promised not to invade. On the other hand, Kennedy also received the hard message which basically revealed that if we pressed on and invaded Cuba,they would respond with massive military force. McNamara stressed how important it was to empathize with Cuba,if we didnt the consequences could be a nuclear contend holocaust. Kennedy ended up empathizing with them by responding to the first message.This action could of rescue us from a possible Nuclear War and from devastation, disaster, and from loosing trillions of innocent American people. McNamara describe s the relationship between empathy, morality, and war. He thinks that during war in order to be victorious you acquire to see the way the enemy sees and try to rent peace with them. From a moral stand point, do whats trump out for the common goodish. Its best to make peace or at least negotiate and come to an agreement to avoid whatever consequences that could stake innocent civilians. I think he believed more in peace and harmony than in war.It was best to just avoid it if possible and negotiate then avoid conflict. Later on in the documentary, McNamara describes the bolt bombings of Japanese cities. He argues is it moral to take the lives of 100,000 of Japanese civilians in one night just to move on the war. On top of burning the cities, Lemay wanted to drop a bomb. McNamara argued that proportionality was a guideline in war. We shouldnt overdue it just to win. We should have it evened out with the enemy on casualties and civilian deaths. Lemay considered his actions to be thought base if they had lost.So judging from that Id say that if his side lost, then loosing that many people would have been for nothing. If they would of won, it would have been moral is the conclusion Im drawing from this. Is it ever legitimate to criticize your countrys actions in a time of war? I think so yes, and I wouldnt consider it to be unpatriotic for disagreeing with the government. Freedom of lecture is one thing our country is founded on and ein truthone can have their own personal view or criticism. One can still have love for ones country and not agree with their policies or in this particular case, war tactics.Some people may not be for war because of the innocent lives lost men,women, and children. Some people might especially be against nuclear war because of innocent lives and it just causes more riskiness and conflict. In my opinion it is legitimate to argue or criticize about war or any other action a country carries out. This documentary opened my eyes and changed the way I authentically saw Nuclear War and the effects and consequences it can have. The Cuban Missile Crisis had very high lay on the line to cause not only a Nuclear War, but a Nuclear war Holocaust. With organism struck with one bomb, there is a possibility we would of bombed Cuba back.I dont believe we would of surrendered. Other countries would of gotten involved and devastation and injustice as of a result from this would have been very great. The fire bombings described in Japan was very disproportionate and unevenly scattered. Cities everywhere in Japan had different numbers of deaths and injuries. Lemay thought this had to be do in order to win the war, even though it was considered immoral. This documentary was an eye opener and it really gave good insight on the key ways to being successful in a war. McNamara called it The Rules of War.