Sense from Seattle

Common sense thoughts on life and current affairs by a Seattle area sexagenarian, drawing on personal experience, years of learning as a counselor to thousands of families and an innate passion for informed knowledge, to uniquely express sensible, thoughtful, honest and independent views.

Friday, September 30, 2005

Cut and Run


In another throwback to the Vietnam War era, the Bush Administration has resurrected the phrase”cut and run”, used as a pejorative to malign the viewpoint of those who believe the invasion of Iraq was a mistake and that we should withdraw our troops.

Cutting losses in a losing situation is considered wise action in most contexts, as for example where an economic investment has proven to be a bad one and will most likely only get worse. But “cut and run” in the context of a war or battle actually has a more precise historical origin than just reducing losses. As the July 21, 2004, issue of the Word Detective points out [about half way down the page], perhaps as long ago as the 17th century, the phrase referred to a situation in which an anchored war ship was facing overwhelming attack and needed to flee to have any hope of being saved. With no time to spare hoisting the anchor, the order would be given to “cut and run”, whereupon the anchor line would be severed and the ship would depart in haste.

The “cut and run” tactic was historically considered acceptable, but the phrase was used during the Vietnam War and now in the Iraq invasion aftermath to denote some sort of unacceptable and shameful betrayal. Gregg Trimb, Webmaster of the Progressive USA News and Views has an excellent personal commentary explaining why the Bush Administration is using the phony “cut and run” attack to obscure the realities in Iraq and why we need to withdraw our troops and turn the Iraq problem over to the United Nations. Gregg points out such a course would not be a betrayal, but rather an honorable acknowledgement of the mistakes made by the Bush Administration and an honest recognition of the reasons we need to withdraw our troops.

That this phrase can likewise be used pejoratively against the Bush Administration is demonstrated by this August, 2005, report entitled “Cut and Run”, by the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, criticizing the EPA betrayal of Butte, Montana, the largest Superfund site in the US.

Cut and Run is also the name of a British board game, which is promoted thus: “You travel the world building an empire of casinos, betting big bucks outwitting and bluffing your opponents - then, when the time is right...Cutting and Running for victory!” Too bad Tony Blair did not send George Bush this game to play instead of sending him erroneous encouragement to invade Iraq.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tom,
Very lucid article. I think I am going to enjoy the Word Detective in the future as well. Your examples of the losers in the Revolutionary and Civil War being good citizens in ordinary times is provoking. I think there may be parallels with the Red Guards in China. But I can't think it through now. Also the White and Red Russians. One question: why do you use the phrase, "the so called Civil war"?
John from Phoenix

6:11 PM  
Blogger Tom Blake said...

Aside from the fact "civil war" is an oxymoron, I believe the war in America in the 1860s needs to be more accurately labelled. Too many Southern sympathizers continue to look on that war as a resistance to an invasion by the North, or as a Northern transgression on the right of the Southern states to secede from the Union, and that distorted mentality continues to retard America's progress toward its ideals.

The official name for the war as designated by the US Government was "The War of the Rebellion". Because the states claiming to have seceded from the Union did not have a right to do so, and because they were taking up arms against the US government in open resistance to the authority of that lawful government, they were considered to be in rebellion. The Rebellion was successfully put down by military force and the participation of the rebellious states in the Federal government was gradually restored in full.

Unfortunately, as in many wars, the military victory did not win the hearts and minds of all the people in the South.

Tom

9:49 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home