Pitiful, Helpless Giant
America after failure in Iran
Doesn’t this sound familiar? On April 30, 1970 President Richard Nixon told the American people that it was necessary to invade the neutral nation of Cambodia to destroy enemy troops from North Vietnam operating there. Failure to take this action, he argued, would drastically weaken America’s global power.
If, when the chips are down, the world’s most powerful nation, the United States of America, acts like a pitiful, helpless giant, the forces of totalitarianism and anarchy will threaten free nations and free institutions throughout the world.
Nixon also acknowledged that his war was unpopular and that his party might suffer in the coming elections.
A majority of the American people, a majority of you listening to me, are for the withdrawal of our forces from Vietnam. The action I have taken tonight is indispensable for the continuing success of that withdrawal program.
A majority of the American people want to end this war rather than to have it drag on interminably. The action I have taken tonight will serve that purpose.
A majority of the American people want to keep the casualties of our brave men in Vietnam at an absolute minimum. The action I take tonight is essential if we are to accomplish that goal….
No one is more aware than I am of the political consequences of the action I have taken. It is tempting to take the easy political path: to blame this war on previous administrations and to bring all of our men home immediately, regardless of the consequences, even though that would mean defeat for the United States;…
I would rather be a one-term President and do what I believe is right than to be a two-term President at the cost of seeing America become a second-rate power and to see this Nation accept the first defeat in its proud 190-year history.
In 1970 Nixon sent about 32,000 US troops along with 48,000 South Vietnamese soldiers into Cambodia. They failed to locate and destroy the suspected enemy headquarters but did weaken enemy capabilities before withdrawing at the end of June. As the JCS History of the Vietnam War notes:
In highlighting the results of the operations, the President reported the capture of: 22,892 individual weapons and 2,509 crew-served weapons; more than 15 million rounds of ammunition, or about what the enemy had fired in South Vietnam during the previous year; 14 million pounds of rice, sufficient to feed all the enemy combat battalions estimated to be in South Vietnam for about four months; 143,000 rounds of rocket, mortar, and recoilless rifle ammunition, equivalent to the amount used by the enemy in South Vietnam during a 14-month period; and 199,522 anti-aircraft rounds, 5,482 mines, 62,022 grenades, and 83,000 pounds of explosives. In addition, the US and South Vietnamese forces captured 435 vehicles and destroyed over 11,688 bunkers and other military structures.
On February 28, 2026 President Trump sent US forces to destroy Iranian missile, air, and naval forces so that the world would never be threatened by an Iranian nuclear weapon. The Hegseth Pentagon, like Robert McNamara’s and Melvin Laird’s Pentagon, bragged about how much destruction it had wrought. The old numbers were about enemy killed; the new numbers were about missile and drone sites, artillery batteries, and ships destroyed. For example, JCS Chairman Dan Caine reported these details on April 8:
Since the beginning of major combat operations, the United States Joint Force has struck more than 13,000 targets, including in that 13,000, more than 4,000 dynamic targets that popped up on the battlefield and were immediately addressed, thanks to the exceptional command and control system and intelligence acumen and agility of our Joint Force.
CENTCOM forces destroyed approximately 80 percent of Iran’s air defense systems, striking more than 1,500 air defense targets, more than 450 ballistic missile storage facilities, 800 one-way attack drones storage facilities. All of these systems are gone. We’ve devastated Iran’s command and control and logistical networks, destroying more than 2,000 command and control nodes and degrading their ability to target US and friendly forces.
In both cases, the numbers were big but misleading. Tactical success but strategic failure. Nixon didn’t drive the North Vietnamese out of Cambodia; Trump hasn’t forced Iran to surrender. Nixon’s war remained unpopular until he agreed to stop the bombing and withdraw US forces. Trump’s war will remain unpopular until US forces are home safely and gas prices drop to 2024 levels.
The big difference is that America’s failure in Vietnam did not have catastrophic consequences. Dominoes fell in Southeast Asia, but America remained a superpower in most of the rest of the world. The consequences of US humiliation by Iran are huge and growing.
In 2015 a phalanx of powers was united in enforcing nuclear limits on Iran. China, Russia, Europe, and the UN Security Council and the IAEA monitored Iranian compliance.
In 2026, American allies are doubtful of US support and many may cozy up to Iran in self-protection. Israelis are angry that America is dictating terms of peace. The Gulf nations that until now have welcomed a US military presence are recalculating.
In 2024 the Strait of Hormuz was open and free to navigation. In 2026 it is essentially closed, with supply shocks and global shortages of fuel, fertilizer and aluminum wrecking the world economy. Even if there is an agreed reopening, it will take months – and hereafter all will recognize that Iran could close it again.
In 2018, when Trump trashed the JCPOA negotiated by the Obama Administration, there were tight limits with effective monitoring on Iranian nuclear activities. They would have expired and thus were subject to new negotiations, but they were in effect. The JCPOA was 159 pages of details.
In 2026, the new MOU is one page of broad points, with key details supposedly to be resolved in the next 60 days. As we know from the aphorism in many cultures, the devil is in the details.
Even if there is US-Iranian agreement and even if those details are strong and effective at preventing an Iranian nuclear capability, the Trump Deal will fall far short of containing the Iran threat.
Critics of JCPOA raised three persuasive points: 1. The nuclear limits were not permanent. 2. There were no limits on Iranian missile capabilities. 3. There were no limits on Iranian proxy forces like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
The same can be said of the Trump Deal. The nuclear limits, once finalized, may appear ironclad, but all treaties are subject to rust and cancellation – and clandestine measures of evasion. There are no limits on Iranian missiles. There are no specific limits on proxy forces and it is unlikely that Israel will agree to any limits to its self defense.
If and when there is a completed multi-page agreement, it will have to be submitted to Congress in accordance with the 2015 INARA. While 2/3 approval is not necessary unless the deal is a formal treaty, a symbolic defeat would warn Iran that future administrations might pull out from the agreement.
All of this could have been avoided. The negotiations as of February 27 were reportedly making progress. But now we have a deeply wounded and angry Iranian government and a globally damaged economy. Sure, peace is better than war. And even this peace might be better than renewed war. TBD.
But America is now that pitiful, helpless giant that couldn’t force Iran to capitulate to its demands and couldn’t fully protect its own allies.