IBM
By:
Date:
The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons From the Life of Robert S. McNamara
McNamara: Is this
chart at a reasonable height? Or do you want it lowered? Earlier
tonight ??? let me first ask the T.V., are you ready? All set?
Let me hear your
voice level to make sure it's the same.
EM: Okay, how's my
voice level?
McNamara: That's
fine.
EM: Terrific.
McNamara: Now I
remember exactly the sentence I left off on. I remember how it
started, and I was cut off in the middle. But you can fix it up some
way. I don't want to go back, introduce the sentence, because I know
exactly what I wanted to say.
EM: Go ahead!
McNamara: Okay. Any
military commander who is honest with himself, or with those he's
speaking to, will admit that he has made mistakes in the application
of military power. He's killed people unnecessarily ??? his own
troops or other troops ??? through mistakes, through errors of
judgment. A hundred, or thousands, or tens of thousands, maybe even a
hundred thousand. But, he hasn't destroyed nations.
And the conventional
wisdom is don't make the same mistake twice, learn from your
mistakes. And we all do. Maybe we make the same mistake three times,
but hopefully not four or five. They'll be no learning period with
nuclear weapons. You make one mistake and you're going to destroy
nations
In my life, I've
been part of wars. 3 years in the U.S. Army during World War II. 7
years as Secretary of Defence during the Vietnam War. 13 years at the
World Bank across the world. At my age, 85, I'm at age where I can
look back and derive some conclusions about my actions. My rule has
been try to learn, try to understand what happened. Develop the
lessons and pass them on.
McNamara and the
Pentagon
Harry Reasoner: This
is the Secretary of Defence of the United States, Robert McNamara.
His department absorbs 10% of the national income of this country,
and over half of every tax dollar. His job has been called the
toughest in Washington, and McNamara is the most controversial figure
that has ever held the job. Walter Lippmann calls him not only the
best Secretary of Defense, but the first one who ever asserted
civilian control over the military. His critics call him "a
conman," "an IBM machine with legs," "an arrogant
dictator."
Mr. Secretary, I've
noticed in several cabinet offices that little silver calendar thing
there. Can you explain that?
McNamara: Yes, this
was given by President Kennedy. On the calendar are engraved the
dates: October 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,24, 25, 26, 27, and
finally 28, were the dates when we literally looked down the gun
barrel into nuclear war.
Lesson #1: Empathize
with your enemy.
Under a cloak of
deceit, the Soviet Union introduced nuclear missiles into Cuba,
targeting 90 million Americans. The C.I.A. said the warheads had not
been delivered yet. They thought 20 were coming on a ship named the
Poltava. We mobilized 180,000 troops. The first day's air attack was
planned at 1080 sorties, a huge air attack.
October 16, 1962
Kennedy: In the next
24 hours, what is it we need to do?
McNamara: Mr.
President, we need to do two things, it seems to me. First, we need
to develop a specific strike plan. The second thing we have to do is
to consider the consequences. I don't know quite what kind of a world
we'll live in after we've struck Cuba. How do we stop at that point?
I don't know the answer to this.
Kennedy: The chances
of this becoming a much broader struggle are increased as you step up
the ? talk about danger to the United States.
McNamara: Kennedy
was trying to keep us out of war. I was trying to help him keep up
out of war. And General Curtis LeMay, whom I served under as a matter
of fact in World War II, was saying "Let's go in, let's totally
destroy Cuba."
On that critical
Saturday, October 27th, we had two Khrushchev messages in front of
us. One had come in Friday night, and it had been dictated by a man
who was either drunk or under tremendous stress. Basically, he said,
"If you'll guarantee you won't invade Cuba, we'll take the
missiles out."
Then before we could
respond, we had a second message that had been dictated by a bunch of
hard-liners. And it said, in effect, "If you attack, we're
prepared to confront you with masses of military power."
So, what to do? We
had, I'll call it, the soft message and the hard message.
At the elbow of
President Kennedy was Tommy Thompson, former U.S. Ambassador to
Moscow. He and Jane, his wife, had literally lived with Khrushchev
and his wife upon occasion. Tommy Thompson said, "Mr. President,
I urge you to respond to the soft message."
The President said
to Tommy, "We can't do that, that'll get us nowhere."
Tommy said, "Mr.
President, you're wrong." Now that takes a lot of guts.
October 27, 1962
Kennedy: We're not
going to get these missiles out of Cuba, probably anyway, by
negotiation.
Thompson: I don't
agree, Mr. President. I think there's still a chance.
Kennedy: That he'll
back down?
Thompson: The
important thing for Khrushchev, it seems to me, is to be able to say,
"I saved Cuba, I stopped an invasion."
McNamara: In
Thompson's mind was this thought: Khrushchev's gotten himself in a
hell of a fix. He would then think to himself, "My God, if I can
get out of this with a deal that I can say to the Russian people:
'Kennedy was going to destroy Castro and I prevented it.'"
Thompson, knowing Khrushchev as he did, thought Khrushchev will
accept that. And Thompson was right.
That's what I call
empathy. We must try to put ourselves inside their skin and look at
us through their eyes, just to understand the thoughts that lie
behind their decisions and their actions.
Khrushchev's
advisers were saying, "There can be no deal unless you somewhat
reduce the pressure on us, when you ask us to reduce the pressure on
you."
EM: Also, we had
attempted to invade Cuba.
McNamara: Well, with
the Bay of Pigs. That undoubtedly influenced their thinking, I think
that's correct. But, more importantly, from a Cuban and a Russian
point of view, they knew what in a sense I really didn't know: we had
attempted to assassinate Castro under Eisenhower and under Kennedy
and later under Johnson. And in addition to that, major voices in the
U.S. were calling for invasion.
In the first
message, Khrushchev said this: "We and you ought not to pull on
the ends of a rope which you have tied the knots of war. Because the
more the two of us pull, the tighter the knot will be tied. And then
it will be necessary to cut that knot, and what that would mean is
not for me to explain to you. I have participated in two wars and
know that war ends when it has rolled through cities and villages,
everywhere sowing death and destruction. For such is the logic of
war. If people do not display wisdom, they will clash like blind
moles and then mutual annihilation will commence."
Lesson #2:
Rationality will not save us.
I want to say, and
this is very important: at the end we lucked out. It was luck that
prevented nuclear war. We came that close to nuclear war at the end.
Rational individuals: Kennedy was rational; Khrushchev was rational;
Castro was rational. Rational individuals came that close to total
destruction of their societies. And that danger exists today.
The major lesson of
the Cuban missile crisis is this: the indefinite combination of human
fallibility and nuclear weapons will destroy nations. Is it right and
proper that today there are 7500 strategic offensive nuclear
warheads, of which 2500 are on 15 minute alert, to be launched by the
decision of one human being?
It wasn't until
January, 1992, in a meeting chaired by Castro in Havana, Cuba, that I
learned 162 nuclear warheads, including 90 tactical warheads, were on
the island at the time of this critical moment of the crisis. I
couldn't believe what I was hearing, and Castro got very angry with
me because I said, "Mr. President, let's stop this meeting.
This is totally new to me, I'm not sure I got the translation right."
"Mr. President,
I have three questions to you. Number one: did you know the nuclear
warheads were there? Number two: if you did, would you have
recommended to Khrushchev in the face of an U.S. attack that he use
them? Number three: if he had used them, what would have happened to
Cuba?"
He said, "Number
one, I knew they were there. Number two, I would not have recommended
to Khrushchev, I did recommend to Khrushchev that they be used.
Number three, 'What would have happened to Cuba?' It would have been
totally destroyed." That's how close we were.
EM: And he was
willing to accept that?
Yes, and he went on
to say: "Mr. McNamara, if you and President Kennedy had been in
a similar situation, that's what you would have done." I said,
"Mr. President, I hope to God we would not have done it. Pull
the temple down on our heads? My God!"
In a sense, we'd
won. We got the missiles out without war. My deputy and I brought the
five Chiefs over and we sat down with Kennedy. And he said,
"Gentlemen, we won. I don't want you ever to say it, but you
know we won, I know we won."
And LeMay said,
"Won? Hell, we lost. We should go in and wipe 'em out today."
LeMay believed that
ultimately we're going to confront these people in a conflict with
nuclear weapons. And, by God, we better do it when we have greater
superiority than we will have in the future.
At the time, we had
a 17 to 1 strategic advantage in nuclear numbers. We'd done 10 times
as many tests as they had. We were certain we could maintain that
advantage if we limited the tests. The Chiefs we're all opposed. They
said, "The Soviets will cheat." I said, "How will they
cheat?" You won't believe this, but they said, "They'll
test them behind the moon." I said, "You're out of your
minds." I said, "That's absurd."
It's almost
impossible for our people today to put themselves back into that
period. In my 7 years as Secretary, we came within a hair's breath of
war with the Soviet Union on three different occasions. 24 hours a
day, 365 days a year for 7 years as Secretary of Defence, I lived the
Cold War.
During the Kennedy
administration, they designed a 100 megaton bomb. It was tested in
the atmosphere. I remember this. Cold War? Hell, it was a hot war!
I think the human
race needs to think more about killing, about conflict. Is that what
we want in this 21st Century? 1918 My earliest memory is of a city
exploding with joy. It was November 11,1918.
I was two years old.
You may not believe that I have the memory, but I do. I remember the
tops of the streetcars being crowded with human beings cheering and
kissing and screaming. End of World War I ? We'd won. But also
celebrating the belief of many Americans, particularly Woodrow
Wilson, we'd fought a war to end all wars. His dream was that
the world could avoid great wars in the future. Disputes among great
nations would be resolved.
I also remember that
I wasn't allowed to go outdoors to play with my friends without
wearing a mask. There was an un-Godly flu epidemic. Large
numbers of Americans were dying. 600,000 and millions across the
world.
My class in the
first grade was housed in a shack. A wooden shack. But we had an
absolutely superb teacher. And this teacher gave a test to the class
every month, and she reseated the class based on the results of that
test. There were vertical rows, and she put the person with the
highest grade in the first seat on the left-hand row. And I worked my
tail off to be in that first seat.
Now the majority of
the classmates were Whites, Caucasians, so on ? Wasps if you will.
But my competition for that first seat were Chinese, Japanese, and
Jews. On Saturday and Sunday, I went and played with my classmates.
They went to their ethnic schools. They learned their native
language, they learned their culture, their history. And they came
back determined on Monday to beat that damn Irishman. But, they
didn't do it very often.
Reasoner: One
Congressman called you "Mr. I have all the answers McNamara."
And there's been
suggestion from some Congressman that you come up there ?
in spite of the
weight of their experience ? prepared to give them simple, little
lessons in things. Is that your attitude?
McNamara: No.
Perhaps I don't know how much I don't know, and there is much indeed.
I do make a serious effort to prepare myself properly for these
Congressional discussions. I suppose I spend perhaps a 100 or 120
hours in testifying before Congress each year. And each hour of
testimony requires 3 to 4 hours of preparation.
Reasoner: What about
the contention that your attitude is sometimes arrogant, that you
never admit that you were wrong. Have you ever been wrong, sir?
RSM: Oh, yes indeed.
I'm not going to tell you. If you don't know, I'm not going to tell
you ? oh, on countless occasions.
I applied to
Stanford University. I very much wanted to go. But, I couldn't afford
it, so I lived at home and I went to Berkeley. $52 dollars a year
tuition. I started Berkeley in the bottom of the depression. 25
million males were unemployed.
Out of that class of
3500, three elected to Phi Beta Kappa at the end of the Sophomore
year. Of those three, one became a Rhodes Scholar. I went to Harvard.
The third went to work for $65 dollars a month and was damn happy to
have the job.
The Society was on
the verge of ? I don't want to say "revolution." Although,
had President Roosevelt not done some of the things he did, it could
have become far more violent. In any event, that was what I was
thrown into.
I never heard of
Plato and Aristotle before I became a Freshman at Berkley. And I
remember Professor Lowenberg ? the Freshman philosophy professor
? I couldn't wait to go to another class.
Lesson #3: There's
something beyond one's self.
I took more
philosophy classes ? particularly one in logic and one in ethics.
Stress on values and something beyond one's self, and a
responsibility to society.
After graduating
University of California I went to Harvard graduate school of
business for two years and then I went back to San Francisco.
I began to court
this young lady that I'd met when we were 17 in our first week at
Berkley: Margaret Craig. And I was making some progress after eight
or nine months. I proposed and she accepted.
She went with her
aunt and her mother on a trip across the country. She telegraphed
me "Must order engraved invitations to include your middle name,
what is it?"
And I wired back,
"My middle name is 'Strange.'"
And she said "I
know it's 'strange, but what is it?"
Well, I mean it is
Strange, it's Robert Strange McNamara.
And it was a
marriage made in heaven. At the end of a year we had our first child.
The delivery costs were $100, and we paid that $10 a month. Those
were some of the happiest days of our life. And then the war came.
I'd been promoted to
assistant professor. I was the youngest assistant professor at
Harvard ? and a salary by the way of $4000 a year. Harvard business
school's market was drying up?
the males were being drafted or
volunteering. So the Dean, being far-sighted, brought back a
government contract to establish an officer candidate school for what
was called "Statistical Control" in the Air Force.
We said to the Air
Force, "Look, we're not going to take anybody you send up here.
We're going to select the people. You have a punch card for every
human being brought into the Air Corps. We're going to run those
cards through the IBM sorting machines, and we're going to sort on
age, education, accomplishments, grades, etc." We were looking
for the best and the brightest. The best brains, the greatest
capacity to lead, the best judgement.
The U.S. was just
beginning to bomb. We were bombing by daylight. The loss rate was
very, very high, so they commissioned a study. And what did we find?
We found the abort rate was 20%. 20% of the planes that took off to
bomb targets in Germany turned around before they got to their
target. Well that was a hell of a mess? we lost 20% of our capability
right there.
The form, I think it
was form ??? or something like that was a mission report. And if you
aborted a mission you had to write down 'why.' So we get all these
things and we analyse them, and we finally concluded it was baloney.
They were aborting out of fear.
Because the loss
rate was 4% per sortie, the combat tour was 25 sorties ? it
didn't mean that 100% of them were going to be killed but a hell of a
lot of them were going to be killed. They knew that and they found
reasons to not go over the target. So we reported this.
One of the
commanders was Curtis LeMay a Colonel in command of a B-24 group. He
was the finest combat commander of any service I came across in war.
But he was extraordinarily belligerent, many thought brutal. He got
the report. He issued an order. He said, "I will be in the lead
plane on every mission. Any plane that takes off will go over the
target, or the crew will be court-marshaled." The abort rate
dropped over night. Now that's the kind of commander he was.
Announcer: Ladies
and Gentlemen, the President of the United States.
Roosevelt: My
friends, on this Christmas Eve, there are over ten million men in the
Armed Forces of the United States alone. One year ago, one million,
seven hundred thousand were serving overseas. By next July 1st, that
number will rise to over five million. Plenty of bad news for the
Japs in the not too far distant future.
Lesson #4: Maximize
Efficiency.
The U.S. Air Force
had a new airplane named the B-29. The B-17s and B-24s in Europe
bombed from 15,000, 16,000 feet. The problem was they were subject to
anti-aircraft fire and to fighter aircraft. To relieve that, this
B-29 was being developed that bombed from high altitude and it was
thought we could destroy targets much more efficiently and
effectively.
I was brought back
from the 8th Air Force and assigned to the first B-29s, the 58th Bomb
Wing. We had to fly those planes from the bases in Kansas to India.
Then we had to fly fuel over the hump into China.
The airfields were
built with Chinese labor. It was an insane operation. I can still
remember hauling these huge rollers to crush the stone and make them
flat. A long rope, somebody would slip. The roller would roll over,
everybody would laugh and go on.
We were supposed to
take these B-29s ? there were no tanker aircraft there. We were to
fill them with fuel, fly from India to Chengtu; offload the fuel; fly
back to India; make enough missions to build up fuel in Chengtu; fly
to Yawata, Japan; bomb the steel mills; and go back to India.
We had so little
training on this problem of maximizing efficiency, we actually found
to get some of the B-29s back instead of offloading fuel, they had to
take it on. To make a long story short, it wasn't worth a damn. And
it was LeMay who really came to that conclusion, and led the Chiefs
to move the whole thing to the Marianas, which devastated Japan.
LeMay was focused on
only one thing: target destruction. Most Air Force Generals can tell
you how many planes they had, how many tons of bombs they dropped, or
whatever the hell it was.
But, he was the only
person that I knew in the senior command of the Air Force who focused
solely on the loss of his crews per unit of target destruction. I was
on the island of Guam in his command in March of 1945. In that single
night, we burned to death 100,000 Japanese civilians in Tokyo: men,
women, and children.
EM: Were you aware
this was going to happen?
McNamara: Well, I
was part of a mechanism that in a sense recommended it. I analysed
bombing operations, and how to make them more efficient. i.e. Not
more efficient in the sense of killing more, but more efficient in
weakening the adversary.
I wrote one report
analysing the efficiency of the B-29 operations. The B-29 could get
above the fighter aircraft and above the air defence, so the loss
rate would be much less. The problem was the accuracy was also much
less.
Now I don't want to
suggest that it was my report that led to, I'll call it, the
fire-bombing. It isn't that I'm trying to absolve myself of blame. I
don't want to suggest that it was I who put in LeMay's mind that his
operations were totally inefficient and had to be drastically
changed. But, anyhow, that's what he did. He took the B-29s down to
5,000 feet and he decided to bomb with fire-bombs.
I participated in
the interrogation of the B-29 bomber crews that came back that night.
A room full of crewmen and intelligence interrogators. A captain got
up, a young captain said: "God dammit, I'd like to know who the
son of a bitch was that took this magnificent airplane, designed to
bomb from 23,000 feet and he took it down to 5,000 feet and I lost my
wingman. He was shot and killed."
LeMay spoke in
monosyllables. I never heard him say more than two words in sequence.
It was basically "Yes," "No," "Yup," or
"The hell with it." That was all he said. And LeMay was
totally intolerant of criticism. He never engaged in discussion with
anybody.
He stood up. "Why
are we here? Why are we here? You lost your wingman; it hurts me as
much as it does you. I sent him there. And I've been there, I know
what it is. But, you lost one wingman, and we destroyed Tokyo."
50 square miles of
Tokyo were burned. Tokyo was a wooden city, and when we dropped these
firebombs, it just burned it.
Lesson #5: Proportionality
should be a guideline in war.
EM: The choice of
incendiary bombs, where did that come from?
McNamara: I think
the issue is not so much incendiary bombs. I think the issue is: in
order to win a war should you kill 100,000 people in one night, by
firebombing or any other way? LeMay's answer would be clearly "Yes."
"McNamara, do
you mean to say that instead of killing 100,000, burning to death
100,000 Japanese civilians in that one night, we should have burned
to death a lesser number or none? And then had our soldiers cross the
beaches in Tokyo and been slaughtered in the tens of thousands? Is
that what you're proposing? Is that moral? Is that wise?"
Why was it necessary
to drop the nuclear bomb if LeMay was burning up Japan? And he went
on from Tokyo to firebomb other cities. 58% of Yokohama. Yokohama is
roughly the size of Cleveland. 58% of Cleveland destroyed. Tokyo is
roughly the size of New York. 51% percent of New York destroyed. 99%
of the equivalent of Chattanooga, which was Toyama. 40% of the
equivalent of Los Angeles, which was Nagoya. This was all done before
the dropping of the nuclear bomb, which by the way was dropped by
LeMay's command.
Proportionality
should be a guideline in war. Killing 50% to 90% of the people of 67
Japanese cities and then bombing them with two nuclear bombs is not
proportional, in the minds of some people, to the objectives we were
trying to achieve.
I don't fault Truman
for dropping the nuclear bomb. The U.S./Japanese War was one of
the most brutal wars in all of human history ? kamikaze pilots,
suicide, unbelievable. What one can criticize is that the human race
prior to that time ? and today ? has not really grappled with what
are, I'll call it, "the rules of war." Was there a rule
then that said you shouldn't bomb, shouldn't kill, shouldn't burn to
death 100,000 civilians in one night?
LeMay said, "If
we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals."
And I think he's right. He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war
criminals. LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought
immoral if his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose
and not immoral if you win?
March 2, 1964
Lyndon B. Johnson: I
want you to dictate to me a memorandum of a couple of pages. Four
letter words and short sentences on the situation in Vietnam, the
"Vietnam Picture." This morning Senator Scott said that
"The war which we can neither win, lose, nor drop is evidence of
an instability of ideas. A floating series of judgements, our policy
of nervous conciliation, which is extremely disturbing." Do you
think it's a mistake to explain about Vietnam and what we're faced
with?
McNamara: Well, I do
think, Mr. President, it would be wise for you to say as little as
possible. The frank answer is we don't know what is going on out
there. The signs I see coming through the cables are disturbing
signs. It is a very uncertain period.
March 10, 1964
Johnson: We need
somebody over there that can get us some better plans than we've got.
What I want is somebody that can lay up some plans to trap these guys
and whup the hell out of them. Kill some of them, that's what I want
to do.
McNamara: I'll try
and bring something back that will meet that objective.
Johnson:
Okay, Bob.
EM: At some point,
we have to approach Vietnam. And I want to know how you can best set
that up for me?
McNamara: Yeah,
well, that's a hard, hard question. I think we have to approach it in
the context of the Cold War. But first, I'll have to talk about Ford.
I'll have to go back to the end of the war.
1945
I had a terrible
headache so Marg drove me in to the Air Force regional hospital. A
week later Marg came in ??? many of the same symptoms. It's hard to
believe and I don't think I've ever heard of another case where two
individuals ? husband and wife ? came down essentially at the same
time with polio. We were both in the hospital with on VJ day.
I had to pay the
bills and they were very heavy. And a friend of mine said, "We're
going to find a corporation in America that needs the advice and
capabilities of this extraordinary group of people I'm going to bring
together and you've got to be a part of it." I said, "The
hell with it. I'm not going to be a part of it. I'm going back to
Harvard. That's what Marg and I want to do. I'm going to spend my
life there."
He said, "Look,
Bob, you can't pay Marg's hospital bills, you're crazy as hell."
He said, "By the way the company that most needs our help in all
the U.S. is Ford." Well, I said, "How'd you learn that?"
He said, "Oh, I read in article in Life Magazine."
Of the top thousand
executives at Ford Motor Company, I don't believe there were ten
college graduates, and Henry Ford II needed help. They were gonna
give us tests. Two full days of testing: intelligence tests,
achievement tests, personality tests, you name it. This sounds
absurd, but I remember one of the questions on one of the tests was:
"Would you rather be a florist or a coal miner?" I should
tell you, I had been a florist. I worked as a florist during some of
my Christmas vacations. I put down "coal miner." I think
the reasons are obvious to you.
This group of ten
people had been trained in the officer candidate school at Harvard.
In some tests we actually had the highest marks that had ever been
scored. In other tests, we were in the upper one percentile.
From 1926 to 1946 ?
including the war years ? Ford Motor Company just barely broke even.
It was a God-awful mess. I thought we had a responsibility to
the stockholders and God knows you cannot believe how bad the
situation had been.
Lesson #6: Get the
data.
They didn't have a
market research organization. I set one up. The manager said to me,
"What do you want me to study?" I said, "Find out who
in the hell's buying the Volkswagons. Everybody says it's a no good
car. It was only selling about twenty thousand a year, but I want to
know what's going to happen. Is it going to stay the same, or go
down, or go up? Find out who buys it."
He came back six
months later, he said, "Well, they're professors, and they're
doctors and they're lawyers, and they're obviously people who can
afford more."
Well, that set me to
thinking about what we in the industry should do. Was there a market
we were missing? At this time nobody believed that Americans wanted
cheaper cars. They wanted conspicuous consumption. Cadillac, with
these huge ostentatious fins, set the style for the industry for ten
or fifteen years. And that's what we were up against.
We introduced the
Falcon as a more economical car, and it was a huge success
profit-wise. We accomplished a lot.
I said, "What
about accidents, I hear a lot about accidents." "Oh yes,
we'll get you some data on that." There were about forty odd
thousand deaths per year from automobile accidents, and about a
million, or a million two injuries.
I said, "Well,
what causes it? "Well," he said, "it's obvious. It's
human error and mechanical failure." I said, "Hell, if it's
mechanical failure, we might be involved. Let's dig into this."
I want to know, if it's mechanical error, I want to stop it. Well,
they said, "There's really very few statistics available."
I said, "Dammit, find out what can we learn."
They said, "Well,
the only place we can find that knows anything about it is Cornell
Aeronautical Labs." They said, "The major problem is
packaging." They said, "You buy eggs and you know how eggs
come in a carton?" I said, "No, I don't buy eggs ? I never
??? my wife does it." Well, they said, "You talk to her and
ask her: when she puts that carton down on the drain board when she
gets home, do the eggs break?" And so I asked Marg and she said
"No." So Cornell said, "They don't break because
they're packaged properly. Now if we packaged people in cars the same
way, we could reduce the breakage."
We lacked lab
facilities, so we dropped the human skulls in different packages down
the stairwells of the dormitories at Cornell. Well, that sounds
absurd, but that guy was absolutely right. It was packaging which
could make the difference.
In a crash, the
driver was often impaled on the steering wheel. The passenger was
often injured because he'd hit the windshield or the header bar or
the instrument panel. So, in the 1956 model Ford we introduced
steering wheels that prevented being impaled; we introduced padded
instrument panels; and, we introduced seatbelts. We estimated if
there would be 100% use of the seatbelts, we could save twenty odd
thousand lives a year. Everybody was opposed to it. You couldn't get
people to use seatbelts, but those who did saved their lives.
Now let me jump
ahead. It's July, 1960. John Bugas, vice-president, industrial
relations, clearly had his eyes on
becoming President. I'm the group vice-president in charge of all the
car divisions. Henry was a night owl. He always wanted to go out on
the town. You know, it's 2 AM or something or other. He said, 'Bob,
come on up and have a nightcap.' I said, "Goddammit Henry I
don't want a nightcap, I'm going to bed." John said, "I'll
come up, Henry." Henry said, "I didn't ask you John, I
asked Bob." He said, "Bob, come on up." So I finally
went up ? that's when he asked me to be president.
I was the first
president of the company ? in the history of the company ??? that had
ever been president other than a member of the Ford family. And after
5 weeks I quit.
The telephone rang,
a person comes on and says: "I'm Robert Kennedy. My brother,
Jack Kennedy, would like you to meet our brother-in-law, Sargent
Shriver." 4 o'clock Sarge comes in ? never met him. "I've
been authorized by my brother-in-law, Jack Kennedy, to offer you the
position of Secretary of the Treasury."
I said, "You're
out of your mind." I know a little bit about finance. But I'm
not qualified to be Secretary of the Treasury." "Anticipating
you might say that, the President-Elect authorized me to offer you
the Secretary of Defence."
I said, "Look,
I was in World War II for three years. Secretary of Defence? I'm not
qualified to be Secretary of Defence." "Well," he
said, "anticipating that," he said, "would you at
least do him the courtesy of agreeing to meet with him?"
So I go home. I meet
with Marg. If I could appoint every senior official in the
department, and then if I could be guaranteed I wouldn't have to be
part of that damn Washington social world.
She said, "Well,
okay, why don't you write a contract with the President, and if he'll
accept those two conditions, do it." We total net worth at the
time was on the order of $800,000, but I had huge unfulfilled stock
options worth millions.
And I was one of the
highest paid executives in the world. And the future was of course
brilliant. We had called our children in. Their life would be totally
changed. The salary of a cabinet Secretary then was $25,000 a year.
So we explained to the children that they'd be giving up a few
things. They could care less. Marg could care less.
It was snowing. The
Secret Service took me in to the house by the back way. I can still
see it. There's a love seat, two armchairs with a lamp table in
between. Jack Kennedy is sitting in one armchair and Bobby Kennedy's
sitting in the other. "Mr. President, it's absurd, I'm not
qualified."
"Look, Bob,"
he said, "I don't think there's any school for Presidents
either." He said, "Lets announce it right now." He
said, "I'll write out the announcement."
So he wrote out the
announcement, we walk out the front door. All of these television
cameras and press, till hell wouldn't have it. That's how Marg
learned I had accepted. It was on television ? live.
Kennedy: All right,
why don't we do some pictures afterwards. I've asked Robert McNamara
to assume the responsibilities of Secretary of Defence. And I'm glad
and happy to say that he has accepted this responsibility. Mr.
McNamara leaves the presidency of the Ford Company at great personal
sacrifice.
McNamara: That's the
way it began. You know, it was a traumatic period. My wife probably
got ulcers from it ? may have even ultimately died from the stress.
My son got ulcers. It was very traumatic, but they were some of the
best years of our life and all members of my family benefited from
it. It was terrific.
1963
October 2nd. I had
returned from Vietnam. At that time, we had 16,000 military advisers.
I recommended to President Kennedy and the Security Council that we
establish a plan and an objective of removing all of them within two
years.
October 2nd, 1963
Kennedy: The
advantage to taking them out is?
McNamara: We can say
to the Congress and people that we do have a plan for reducing the
exposure of U.S. combat personnel.
Kennedy: My only
reservation about it is if the war doesn't continue to go well, it
will look like we were overly optimistic.
McNamara: We need a
way to get out of Vietnam, and this is a way of doing it.
Kennedy announced we
were going to pull out all of our military advisors by the end of '65
and we were going to take 1000 out by the end of '63 and we did. But,
there was a coup in South Vietnam. Diem was overthrown and he and his
brother were killed.
I was present with
the President when together we received information of that coup.
I've never seen him more upset. He totally blanched. President Kenndy
and I had tremendous problems with Diem, but my God, he was the
authority, he was the head of state. And he was overthrown by a
military coup. And Kennedy knew and I knew, that to some degree, the
U.S. government was responsible for that.
I was in my office
in the Pentagon, when the telephone rang and it was Bobby. The
President had been shot in Dallas. Perhaps 45 minutes later, Bobby
called again and said the President was dead. Jackie would like me to
come out to the hospital. We took the body to the White House at
whatever it was, 4 AM.
I called the
superintendent of Arlington Cemetery. And he and I walked over those
grounds. They're hauntingly beautiful grounds ? white crosses all in
a row. And finally I thought I'd found the exact spot, the most
beautiful spot in the cemetery. I called Jackie at the White House
and asked her to come out there, and she immediately accepted. And
that's where the President is buried today.
A park service
ranger came up to me and said that he had escorted President Kennedy
on a tour of those grounds a few weeks before. And Kennedy said,
"That was the most beautiful spot in Washington." That's
where he's buried.
Johnson: I will do
my best. That is all I can do. I ask for your help and God's.
February 25, 1964
Three months after
JFK's death. Johnson: Hello, Bob?
McNamara: Yes, Mr. President.
McNamara: Yes, Mr. President.
Johnson: I hate to
modify your speech any because it's been a good one, but I just
wonder if we should find two minutes in there for Vietnam?
McNamara: Yeah, the
problem is what to say about it.
Johnson: I'll tell
you what I would say about it. I would say that we have a commitment
to Vietnamese freedom. We could pull out of there, the dominoes would
fall, and that part of the world would go to the Communists. We could
send our marines in there, and we could get tied down in a Third
World War or another Korean action. Nobody really understands what it
is out there. They're asking questions and saying why don't we do
more. Well, I think this: you can have more war or you can have more
appeasement. But we don't want more of either. Our purpose is to
train these people [the South Vietnamese] and our training's going
good.
McNamara: All right,
sir, I'll?
Johnson: I always
thought it was foolish for you to make any statements about
withdrawing. I thought it was bad psychologically. But you and the
President thought otherwise, and I just sat silent.
McNamara: The
problem is?
Johnson: Then come
the questions: how in the hell does McNamara think, when he's losing
a war, he can pull men out of there?
June 9, 1964
June 9, 1964
McNamara: If you
went to the C.I.A. and said "How is the situation today in South
Vietnam?" I think they would say it's worse. You see it in the
desertion rate, you see it in the morale. You see it in the
difficulty to recruit people. You see it in the gradual loss of
population control.
Many of us in
private would say that things are not good, they've gotten worse. Now
while we say this in private and not public, there are facts
available that find their way in the press. If we're going to stay in
there, if we're going to go up the escalating chain, we're going to
have to educate the people, Mr. President. We haven't done so yet.
I'm not sure now is exactly the right time.
Johnson: No, and I
think it you start doing it they're going to be hollering, "You're
a warmonger."
McNamara: I
completely agree with you.
The Presidential
Race: L.B.J. and Goldwater hit campaign trail.
Goldwater: Make no
bones of this. Don't try to sweep this under the rug. We are at war
in Vietnam. And yet the President and his Secretary of Defense
continues to mislead and misinform the American people, and enough of
it's gone by.
Lesson #7: Belief
and seeing are both often wrong.
August 2, 1964
On August 2nd, the
destroyer Maddox reported it was attacked by a North Vietnamese
patrol boat. It was an act of aggression against us. We were in
international waters. I sent officials from the Defence Department
out and we recovered pieces of North Vietnamese shells ? that were
clearly identified as North Vietnamese shells ??? from the deck of
the Maddox. So there was no question in my mind that it had occurred.
But, in any event, we didn't respond.
And it was very
difficult. It was difficult for the President. There were very, very
senior people, in uniform and out, who said "My God, this
President is" ? they didn't use the word 'coward,' but in effect
? "He's not protecting the national interest."
August 4, 1964
Two days later, the
Maddox and the Turner Joy, two destroyers reported they were
attacked.
Johnson: Now, where
are these torpedoes coming from?
McNamara: Well, we
don't know, presumably from these unidentified craft.
There were sonar
soundings, torpedoes had been detected ??? other indications of
attack from patrol boats. We spent about ten hours that day trying to
find out what in the hell had happened. At one point, the commander
of the ship said, "We're not certain of the attack." At
another point they said, "Yes, we're absolutely positive."
And then finally late in the day, Admiral Sharp said, "Yes,
we're certain it happened."
So I reported this
to Johnson, and as a result there were bombing attacks on targets in
North Vietnam. Johnson said we may have to escalate, and I'm not
going to do it without Congressional authority. And he put forward a
resolution, the language of which gave complete authority to the
President to take the nation to war: The Tonkin Gulf Resolution.
Now let me go back
to the August 4th attack.
August 4. 12:22 PM
Admiral Sharp:
Apparently, there have been at least nine torpedoes in the water. All
missed.
General Burchinal:
Yup.
Admiral Sharp: Wait
a minute now. I'm not so sure about this number of engaged. We've got
to check it out here.
97 Minutes Later.
Admiral Sharp: He
[Admiral Moore] said many of the reported contacts with torpedoes
fired appear doubtful. Freak weather effects on radar and overeager
sonar men may have accounted for many reports.
General Burchinal:
Okay, well I'll tell Mr. McNamara this.
Admiral Sharp:
That's the best I can give you Dave, sorry.
9 Minutes Later.
Admiral Sharp: It
does appear now that a lot of these torpedo attacks were from the
sonar men, you see. And, they get keyed up with a thing like this and
everything they hear on the sonar is a torpedo.
General Burchinal:
You're pretty sure there was a torpedo attack, though?
Admiral Sharp: Oh,
no doubt about that, I think. No doubt about that.
McNamara: It was
just confusion, and events afterwards showed that our judgment that
we'd been attacked that day was wrong. It didn't happen. And the
judgment that we'd been attacked on August 2nd was right. We had
been, although that was disputed at the time. So we were right once
and wrong once.
Ultimately,
President Johnson authorized bombing in response to what he thought
had been the second attack ? it hadn't occurred but that's irrelevant
to the point I'm making here. He authorized the attack on the
assumption it had occurred, and his belief that it was a conscious
decision on the part of the North Vietnamese political and military
leaders to escalate the conflict and an indication they would not
stop short of winning.
We were wrong, but
we had in our minds a mindset that led to that action. And it carried
such heavy costs. We see incorrectly or we see only half of the story
at times.
EM: We see what we
want to believe.
McNamara: You're
absolutely right. Belief and seeing, they're both often wrong.
Johnson: We
Americans know although others appear to forget the risk of spreading
conflict. We still seek no wider war.
McNamara: We
introduced what was called "Rolling Thunder," which over
the years became a very, very heavy bombing program. Two to three
times as many bombs as were dropped on Western Europe during all of
World War II.
This is not
primarily a military problem. It is a battle for the hearts and the
minds of the people of South Vietnam. That's our objective. As a
prerequisite to that, we must be able to guarantee their physical
security.
February 26, 1965.
Johnson: We're off
to bombing these people. We're over that hurdle. The game now is in
the 4th quarter and it's about 78 to nothing. I'm scared to death
about putting ground forces in, but I'm more than frightened about
losing a bunch of planes for lack of security.
McNamara: So am I.
March 6, 1965.
Johnson: The
psychological impact of "The Marines are coming" is gonna
be a bad one. I know every mother is going to say, "Uh oh, this
is it." What we've done with these B-57s is just gonna be Sunday
School stuff compared to the marines. My answer is "yes,"
but my judgment is "no."
McNamara: All right,
we'll take care of it, Mr. President.
Johnson: When are
you going to issue the order?
McNamara: We'll make
it late today so it'll miss some of the morning editions. I'll handle
it in a way that will minimize the announcement.
June 10, 1965
McNamara: [General]
Westmoreland recommended additional 10 battalions, over and above the
13 you've already authorized. Something on the order of 45,000 men. I
would recommend 5 battalions with the strength of about 25,000 men.
Because in the back of my mind, I have a very definite limitation on
commitment. And I don't think the Chiefs do. In fact, I know they
don't.
Johnson: Not a damn
human thinks that 50,000 or 100,000 or 150,000 are gonna end that
war. We're not getting out, but we're trying to hold what we got. And
we're doing a bad?we're doing?we're?we're?we're losing at the rate
we're going.
Announcer: It was
announced today that total American casualties in Vietnam now number
4877, including 748 killed.
Harry Reasoner:
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, on each of his seven inspection
trips to Vietnam has found some positive aspect of the course of the
war there.
McNamara: The most
vivid impression I'm bringing back is that we've stopped losing the
war. The North Vietnamese today we believe have nine regiments of
their regular army in South Vietnam.
Announcer: Some of
the men had little training in a state park in Kentucky before coming
here. But it did not prepare them for the thicket of trees, spiked
vines, thorn bushes, almost perpendicular cliffs, 90 degree
temperatures, insects, and snakes
Johnson: Now America
wins the wars that she undertakes. Make no mistake about it. And we
have declared war on tyranny and aggression. If this little nation
goes down the drain and can't maintain her independence, ask yourself
what's going to happen to all these other little nations.
December 2, 1965.
McNamara: I am more
and more convinced that we ought to think of some action other than
military action as the only program here. I think if we do that by
itself, it's suicide.
I think pushing out
300,000, 400,000 Americans out there without being able to guarantee
what it will lead to is a terrible risk at a terrible cost.
Let me go back one
moment. In the Cuban Missile Crisis, at the end, I think we did put
ourselves in the skin of the Soviets. In the case of Vietnam, we
didn't know them well enough to empathize. And there was total
misunderstanding as a result. They believed that we had simply
replaced the French as a colonial power, and we were seeking to
subject South and North Vietnam to our colonial interests, which was
absolutely absurd. And we, we saw Vietnam as an element of the Cold
War. Not what they saw it as: a civil war.
1995
There aren't many
examples in which you bring two former enemies together, at the
highest levels, and discuss what might have been. I formed the
hypothesis that each of us could have achieved our objectives without
the terrible loss of life. And I wanted to test that by going to
Vietnam.
The former Foreign
Minister of Vietnam, a wonderful man named Thach said, "You're
totally wrong. We were fighting for our independence. You were
fighting to enslave us." We almost came to blows. That was noon
on the first day.
"Do you mean to
say it was not a tragedy for you, when you lost 3 million 4 hundred
thousand Vietnamese killed, which on our population base is the
equivalent of 27 million Americans? What did you accomplish? You
didn't get any more than we were willing to give you at the beginning
of the war. You could have had the whole damn thing: independence,
unification."
"Mr. McNamara,
You must never have read a history book. If you'd had, you'd know we
weren't pawns of the Chinese or the Russians. McNamara, didn't you
know that? Don't you understand that we have been fighting the
Chinese for 1000 years? We were fighting for our independence. And we
would fight to the last man. And we were determined to do so. And no
amount of bombing, no amount of U.S. pressure would ever have stopped
us."
Lesson #8: Be
prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
What makes us
omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? We are the strongest
nation in the world today. I do not believe that we should ever apply
that economic, political, and military power unilaterally. If we had
followed that rule in Vietnam, we wouldn't have been there. None of
our allies supported us. Not Japan, not Germany, not Britain or
France. If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the
merit of our cause, we'd better re-examine our reasoning.
Harry Reasoner:
Americans suffered their heaviest casualties of the war in Vietnam
last week ? 543 killed in action. Another 1,247 were wounded and
hospitalized. The deaths raised the U.S. total in the war so far to
18,239. South Vietnamese put their losses for the week at 522 killed.
Communist losses were not reported.
Contributing to
those record casualties has been the steady Communist bombardment of
the Marine outpost at Khe Sanh. There the North Vietnamese have been
tightening their ring around the 2 square mile division?
EM: To what extent
did you feel that you were the author of stuff, or that you were an
instrument of things outside of your control?
McNamara: Well, I
don't think I felt either. I just felt that I was serving at the
request of the President, who had been elected by the American
people. And it was my responsibility to try to help him to carry out
the office as he believed was in the interest of our people.
What is morally
appropriate in a wartime environment? Let me give you an
illustration. While I was Secretary, we used what's called "Agent
Orange" in Vietnam. A chemical that strips leaves off of trees.
After the war, it is claimed that that was a toxic chemical and it
killed many individuals ? soldiers and civilians ???exposed to it.
Were those who
issued the approval to use Agent Orange: criminals? Were they
committing a crime against humanity? Let's look at the law. Now what
kind of law do we have that says these chemicals are acceptable for
use in war and these chemicals are not. We don't have clear
definitions of that kind. I never in the world would have authorized
an illegal action. I'm not really sure I authorized Agent Orange ? I
don't remember it ? but it certainly occurred, the use of it occurred
while I was Secretary.
Lesson #9: In order
to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
Norman Morrison was
a Quaker. He was opposed to war, the violence of war, the killing. He
came to the Pentagon, doused himself with gasoline. Burned himself to
death below my office.
He held a child in
his arms, his daughter. Passersby shouted, "Save the child!"
He threw the child out of his arms, and the child lived and is alive
today. His wife issued a very moving statement: "Human beings
must stop killing other human beings." And that's a belief that
I shared. I shared it then and I believe it even more strongly today.
How much evil must
we do in order to do good? We have certain ideals, certain
responsibilities. Recognize that at times you will have to engage in
evil, but minimize it.
I remember reading
that General Sherman in the Civil War ? the mayor of Atlanta pleaded
with him to save the city. And Sherman essentially said to the mayor
just before he torched it and burned it down: "War is cruel. War
is cruelty." That was the way LeMay felt. He was trying to save
the country. He was trying to save our nation. And in the process, he
was prepared to do whatever killing was necessary. It's a very, very
difficult position for sensitive human beings to be in. Morrison was
one of those. I think I was.
50,000 people came
to Washington to demonstrate against the war. About 20,000 of them
marched on the Pentagon. The Pentagon is a very, very difficult
building to defend. We placed troops carrying rifles around it ???
U.S. Marshals in front of the soldiers. But I told the President,
"Not a rifle would be loaded without my personal permission."
And I wasn't going to grant it.
EM: What effect did
all of this dissent have on your thinking? I mean, Norman Morrison is
'65, this is '67.
McNamara: Well, it
was a very tense period. A very tense period for my family, which I
don't want to discuss.
EM: How was your
thinking changing during this period?
McNamara: I don't
think my thinking was changing. We were in the Cold War. And this was
a Cold war activity.
Lesson #10: Never
say never.
Reporter: Some
commentators here have said that the war is turning into a kind of
stalemate.
McNamara: No, no. I
think on the contrary. As General Westmoreland has pointed out in
recent weeks in Saigon, the military operations ? the large-unit,
military operations ? have continued to show very substantial
progress.
One of the lessons I
learned early on: never say never. Never, never, never. Never say
never. And secondly, never answer the question that is asked of you.
Answer the question that you wish had been asked of you. And quite
frankly, I follow that rule. It's a very good rule.
EM: When you talk
about the responsibility for something like the Vietnam War, whose
responsibility is it?
McNamara: It's the
president's responsibility. I don't want to fail to recognize the
tremendous contribution I think Johnson made to the country. I don't
want to put the responsibility for Vietnam on his shoulders alone,
but I do ??? I am inclined to believe that if Kennedy had lived, he
would have made a difference. I don't think we would have had 500,000
men there.
Two very telling
photographs. One of them has Johnson like this. You can just see him
thinking: "My God, I'm in a hell of a mess. And this guy is
trying to tell me to do something that I know is wrong and I'm not
gonna do, but how the hell am I gonna get out of this?"
The other
photograph, you can just see me saying: "Jesus Christ, I love
this man, I respect him, but he's totally wrong. What am I gonna do?"
Johnson couldn't
persuade me, and I couldn't persuade him. I had this enormous respect
and affection, loyalty, to both Kennedy and Johnson. But at the end,
Johnson and I found ourselves poles apart.
And I said to a very
close and dear friend of mine, Kay Graham, the former publisher of
the Washington Post: "Even to this day, Kay, I don't know whether
I quit or was fired?" She said, "You're out of your mind.
Of course you were fired."
November 1, 1967. I
presented a memo to Johnson that said, "The course we're on is
totally wrong. We've got to change it. Cut back at what we're doing
in Vietnam. We've got to reduce the casualties, and so on."
It was an
extraordinarily controversial memo, and I took it to him, I delivered
it myself. "Mr. President, nobody has seen this. Not Dean Rusk,
not the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs ? nobody. I know that it may
contain recommendations and statements that you do not agree with and
do not support." I never heard from him.
Something had to
give. There was a rumour that I was facing a mental breakdown ? I was
under such pressure and stress. I don't think that was the case at
all. But it was a really traumatic departure.
That's the way it
ended. Except for one thing: he awarded me the Medal of Freedom in a
very beautiful ceremony at the White House. And he was very, very
warm in his comments. And I became so emotional, I could not respond.
Mr. President, I
cannot find words to express what lies in my heart today. And I think
I better respond on another occasion.
And had I responded,
I would have said: "I know what many of you are thinking. You're
thinking this man is duplicitous. You're thinking that he has held
things close to his chest. You're thinking that he did not respond
fully to the desires and wishes of the American people. And I want to
tell you: "You're wrong." Of course he had personal
idiosyncrasies, no question about it. He didn't accept all the advice
he was given.
On several
occasions, his associates advised him to be more forthcoming. He
wasn't. People did not understand at that time there were
recommendations and pressures that would carry the risk of war with
China and carry the risk of nuclear war. And he was determined to
prevent it. I'm arguing that he had a reason in his mind for doing
what he did."
And, of course,
shortly after I left, Johnson concluded that he couldn't continue.
EM: And at this
point, how many Americans had been killed in Vietnam?
McNamara: About
25,000. Less than half of the number ultimately killed: 58,000.
Historians don't
really like to deal with counterfactuals, with what might have been.
They want to talk about history. "And how the hell do you know,
McNamara, what might have been? Who knows?" Well, I know certain
things.
What I'm doing is
thinking through with hindsight, but you don't have hindsight
available at the time. I'm very proud of my accomplishments, and I'm
very sorry that in the process of accomplishing things, I've made
errors.
Lesson #11: You
can't change human nature.
We all make
mistakes. We know we make mistakes. I don't know any military
commander, who is honest, who would say he has not made a mistake.
There's a wonderful phrase: "the fog of war."
What "the fog
of war" means is: war is so complex it's beyond the ability of
the human mind to comprehend all the variables. Our judgment, our
understanding, are not adequate. And we kill people unnecessarily.
Wilson said: "We
won the war to end all wars." I'm not so naive or simplistic to
believe we can eliminate war. We're not going to change human nature
anytime soon. It isn't that we aren't rational. We are rational. But
reason has limits.
There's a quote from
T.S. Eliot that I just love:
We shall not cease
from exploring
And at the end of
our exploration
We will return to
where we started
And know the place
for the first time.
Now that's in a
sense where I'm beginning to be.
Epilogue
EM: After you left
the Johnson administration, why didn't you speak out against the
Vietnam War?
McNamara: I'm not
going to say any more than I have. These are the kinds of questions
that get me in trouble. You don't know what I know about how
inflammatory my words can appear. A lot of people misunderstand the
war, misunderstand me. A lot of people think I'm a son of a bitch.
EM: Do you feel in
any way responsible for the War? Do you feel guilty?
McNamara: I don't
want to go any further with this discussion. It just opens up more
controversy. I don't want to add anything to Vietnam. It is so
complex that anything I say will require additions and
qualifications.
EM: Is it the
feeling that you're damned if you do, and if you don't, no matter
what?
McNamara: Yeah,
that's right. And I'd rather be damned if I don't.
No comments:
Post a Comment