>Carrol wrote:
>
>> It isn't myth:
>>back in February of 1968 a Colonel really did announce to a
>>TV camera that they had to destroy the village to save it.
>
>But be fair, Carrol: that statement has become the
>canonical example of mindless fanaticism, on par with
>the canonical definition: redoubling one's efforts
>after losing sight of the goal.
Be *fair* to a colonel who destroyed a village in order to save it! No wonder nobody wants to join the All-Left Union.
No, the statement is not used as an example of mindless fanaticism, or of losing sight of the goal. The statement became popular because it showed that imperialism is disingenuous. Again, there was no mistake, the burning of the village wasn't an accident or something gone awry, it happened because it was supposed to. It showed that there was an essential disconnect between the ideological construct of what was going on and what was actually happening.
>I expect that after he sobered up, that man would have
>given anything to take back his words.
Only because they became endlessly repeated. If the war was a bit more popular, such a slogan could have been taken at face value and could have even been a rallying cry for the troops and the public.
>It's not everyone who enjoys making himself the poster child for
>militaristic stupidity.
Not stupidity. Malevolence born of material conditions. Stop confusing the two, it turns your analysis of any number of situations into dimensionless pap.