English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It appears every day that the war in Iraq is becoming more and more similar to our situation in Viet Nam. Vets of this war know this.

2006-06-17 08:52:24 · 13 answers · asked by Thom Thumb 6 in Politics & Government Military

Viet Nam may be spelled that way..... or "Vietnam" Both uses are common in English.

2006-06-17 09:36:38 · update #1

The US Army and Marines lost the Vietnam war militarily, with some help from the Navy and Air Force. The similarities are rife. A people who does not want us there, a major civil war, the desire to keep oil flowing in once case, and rubber in the other. IED's are the punjee pits of the Iraq war, and at this moment, a bill is in the House to require universal conscription.
I'm also a military historian, though Viet Nam is not my main focus. Veterans I have spoken with see chilling similarities between the two wars.

2006-06-17 10:12:29 · update #2

the above is for m1a1mikegolf :)

2006-06-17 10:15:38 · update #3

13 answers

of course they know this but they have to establish free oil trade,this war is about oil you know.Iraq's economy is dominated by the oil sector, which has traditionally provided about 95% of foreign exchange earnings. In the 1980s financial problems caused by massive expenditures in the eight-year war with Iran and damage to oil export facilities by Iran led the government to implement austerity measures, borrow heavily, and later reschedule foreign debt payments. Iraq suffered economic losses from the war of at least US$100 billion. After hostilities ended in 1988, oil exports gradually increased with the construction of new pipelines and restoration of damaged facilities. A combination of low oil prices, repayment of war debts (estimated at around US$3 billion a year) and the costs of reconstruction resulted in a serious financial crisis which was the main short term motivation for the invasion of Kuwait.

On November 20, 2004, the Paris Club of creditor nations agreed to write off 80% ($33 billion) of Iraq's $42 billion debt to Club members. Iraq's total external debt was around $120 billion at the time of the 2003 invasion, and had grown by $5 billion by 2004. The debt relief will be implemented in three stages: two of 30% each and one of 20%.[3]

After the period of economic sanctions many of Iraq's state-owned enterprises were next to collapse. In 2003 the US led Coalition Provisional Authority drew up a framework for largescale privatization and opened up state-owned services to foreign investors. As of 2005, 64% of Iraq's oil reserves are being developed by multinational corporations, based on contracts with the Oil Ministry known as Production Sharing Contracts The insurgency campaign over recent years has hugely dampened US and British efforts to bring in such foreign investment and frequent attacks on the oil infrastructure have also had a major economic impact.

2006-06-17 08:55:49 · answer #1 · answered by jen 5 · 2 0

Absolutely yes! After 5+ years, this country has not only suffered from the tragic loss of over 4,000 brave men and women who were called to serve in a war based on lies and complete miscalculations, but taxpayers are spending 10 Billion Dollars a month on Bush's fiasco in Iraq. Nobel Prize winner in economics, Joseph Stiglitz, estimated that no matter when Bush's disaster ends, we can expect to add Three Trillion Dollars to the bill to support those disabled troops, who will suffer for the rest of their lives from irreparable injuries. Also, consider how much infrastructure could have been built, children educated and insured, or jobs that might have been created had the country and the media risen up, challenged, and sought the truth about Iraq from Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/McCain/Rumsfeld/Li... etc.

2016-05-19 23:06:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think there area few other things that you "missed". There are of course similarities... but you are looking at apples and oranges (they are still both fruits though). History is great, but keep in mind that we are reaching closer every day to global economy (factor one)... the expanse of terrorism to the global scale (factor two)... and the influx of minute by minute news reporting from anywhere in the world (factor three).
Okay, maybe I don't agree with everything that we are doing with international and foriegn policy.... but in looking to globalism, we have to keep as many terrorist off our soil here in the US as we can.... if not I hope you like dodging IED's and the bombing of churches.
Lets hope that we don't remember this in history as a black eye for the "Bush Administration" or the Republican Party.... if we do we may want to go back and see just how well we did dealing with Iran in 1979, or Bosnia, or how we could have possibly allowed the reduction of our HUMIT (human intelligence) capabilities under other adminstrations.
I can defineately atest to what is going on "over there" in both Iraq and Afghanistan... I have been there and lived it. I have helped make that history. I am a veteran of it.... and Panama.... and Honduras and El Salvador.... and Bolivia.... and Columbia. There isn't much I have missed. The most common thing that Iraq and Vietnam share as far as conflicts go is the effects of politicians. They aren't the ones patrolling Fallujah, Al Ramadi, Tikrit or Baghdad. They have the ability to sit within the security of the Beltway and dictate how I need to employ my soldiers, then reduce my benefits while giving themselves a raise. I guess thier job is tougher than mine.

In every war we have or ever will fight.... there will be similarities to Vietnam.... the place my father and three uncles serevd from three to five tours... shortly after they got back from Korea. Aren't we still in Korea? Oh yeah... that one is an armistice... there was no victory.

I think we'll be seeing more of that... in the Middle East.

2006-06-17 11:13:27 · answer #3 · answered by tcatmech2 4 · 0 0

I believe it is important to support our troops first and foremost! I can not see an ending to this war. For every person that dies on each side, we are creating a family of enemies for generations to come. I understand that war has been around since the beginning of time. I even really enjoyed Caesar's Gallic Wars that I had to read in Latin class. That dude had some really great strategies. That was before bombs and rocket launchers and etc.etc. I don't think this war will ever have a winner. It is very sad, when you think about it. Everyone please pray that Jeb Bush doesn't run in 08, cause I don't think I could take another 4 or 8 years of a Bush administration.

2006-06-17 09:05:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I don't understand why we as Americans cannot seem to learn from our past mistakes. Where are the improvements? The training of soldiers is dismal, their is no respect for the people of Iraq. Countless women have been raped by troops no doubt, although their is no media coverage. Innocent people are shot everyday because no one knows who "is the enemy and who isn't" just like in Viet Nam. We are dropping our young people off in a war zone and wondering why they have a negative reaction!

And that has nothing to do with how much I support all the troops there, not just ours. They need better preparation for this and better equipment and people above them that respect the people so that we don't get more Hadithas.

2006-06-17 09:07:42 · answer #5 · answered by Naomi P 4 · 0 0

This war is very similar and very different. The differences of course are location and climate. Humid and hot in Nam and hot and dry in Iraq. The similarities, well we are in a country where we are not welcomed again. The Iraqis want us out of there as did the Vietnamese. Americans think we need to police the world. If we were after terrorists we would have gone into Afghanistan and after Ben Laudin. We would have told the Saudis that since 90% of the individuals on the plane were Saudis they were responsible too.Iraq is for oil and ego only. Saddam as evil as he was, only affected his own people and it was up to them to change things. God weeps..............

2006-06-17 09:11:53 · answer #6 · answered by olderandwiser 4 · 0 0

Sounds like you are the person who does not understand.

I am an Iraq vet and somebody who has studied military history. The only similarity between these two wars is that the enemy cannot defeat us militarily - they are counting on the 'peace movement' within the US to win the war for them.

In fact - I bet that you cannot point out what is different and what is similar between the two wars.

2006-06-17 10:06:11 · answer #7 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0 0

They don't understand because most (including Cheney and Bush) were draft dodgers. The ones who were not weaseled there way out. None of them can compare because none of these nutcase republicans ever fought in a war.
Here are 4 ways to tell if your boyfriend or husband is turning into George Bush.
He occupies your child's elementary school by force, fires everyone, and then brings in Halliburton to run the cafeteria.

2006-06-17 09:29:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

How is it similar?It is not a civil war.It is not armed or funded by a foreign government we don't want to fight.We are not losing troops at an alarming rate.We could level the whole country in twenty minutes.How is it the same?

2006-06-17 09:00:30 · answer #9 · answered by Tommy G. 5 · 0 0

I believe that there is a complete awareness that one war was fought in the tropics and the other is being fought in more desert-like terrain. I don't see how they can be viewed as similar.

2006-06-17 08:56:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers