Do you think we're going to wimp out in Iraq like we did in Vietnam? We would have won in V if we had stayed

Question

there for about 30 years more. But we were so cowardly that we cut and run in 1973. Are we gonna run with our tails between our legs again?

Answer 1

Vietnam and Iraq are two different wars. American troops did not lose the war in Vietnam. That war was lost because the U.S. government didn't have the will to do what needed to be done. We should have bombed North Vietnam into oblivion. Unlike Iraq there were many decent South Vietnamese who did want to live in a democracy. The South Vietnamese government and some Vietnamese troops did leave a lot to be desired, but were better than communism. Many South Vietnamese troops fought bravely and gave all for freedom. Many more suffered greatly after we abandoned them. Iraq on the other hand is made up mostly of people who hate us and each other. You can't trust many of them on any side. The military should not be used as a police force. The Armed Forces of the United States is often asked to do the impossible. Like Vietnam,when you are stuck among the enemy for to long without any real plan to destroy your enemy, you will lose. Been there, done that, Vietnam veteran.

Answer 2

History tends to repeat it self, doesn't it? No we did not learn from our mistakes and it seems that we never will.

The problem with the Iraq war is that a lot of people including my self can not comprehend why?
- Sadam regime was not part of any terrorist attacks and never threatened any western interests!
- They did not have weapons of mass destruction!!

So, why are we there? why are we fighting and look at what happened to Iraq after the invasion! these people were much better off under sadam.

What can I say? Bush really screwed up this time and I am sure this is going to be as bad as Vietnam. I don't think we would have won the Vietnam war if our troops had stayed longer, I am sure all options were exhausted prior to the withdrawl. I just hope this time we can bring peace to Iraq because if our troops leave now, we can only blame our selves for this catastrophe and hopefully we will learn not to interfere in other people's business in the future.

Answer 3

I was 21 in Vietnam. The problem with your logic is that the people who live there have to want democracy. Forcing Democracy down peoples throats should not be our job... We should stay home and lead by example... In the last 6 years I have watched as this government has systematically attempted to dismantle our democracy, and removed some of what we thought we were fighting for in Vietnam. In actuality it was about Zinc, copper, and other natural resources as well as the same arrogance that we are seeing in Washington right now. They told the same lies back then as they are now in IRAQ. Funny thing when I looked around back then I never saw George.

Answer 4

Hi there ! It's too bad that the American people no longer stand behind the common cause of freedom for those who do not have it. Because of the populace's reluctance to do so, brings politics to the fore-front. Now, that politics runs the war, the military is subjugated to popular opinion. The only one currently, who will be happy if the Western world "knuckles under" and leaves Iraq and Afghanistan will be Bin Laden, the Taliban and the Terrorists who support them. I'm a Canadian and there is resentment about our troops at war too. Well; if we won't take the war to them on their turf, they can take the war to us on our turf. We are in this together, my American brother and I hope for this generation's sake, we "dummy" up and do what we have to do ( not necessarily what we want to do) ! Just think WHEN (not IF)they get their nukes ready to deploy on us ... our women won't look too beautiful in a burka ( Muslim dress-gown) and our men in beards kicking the snot out of our women. (This would set Woman's Lib movement back thousands of years). Have we forgotten the cost for freedom and rights ? We have enemies in this world who want our land, homes and people, (some alive - most dead). Slavery would be the order of the day. Hope I'm wrong ! In Nam, the Communists were the "terrorists" of the then generation. Maybe we should change the name of our nations to I - RAN !!!

Answer 5

Clowny boy, if you had been in the Nam you wouldn't be talking like that. But you sit here in your cushy little clown house 5,000 miles from where anything is going on, listening to Bill O'Reilly and passing judgment on the rest of the world! Why don't you volunteer and go fight in the struggle, then come back and see if you still want to pass judgment on anyone. It's my bet you won't be so self righteous!!! But you will for sure be smarter with open eyes!!And yes I did fight in the Nam and my son fought in Iraq.Yes we do need to take the fight in Iraq seriously and either fight to win or get the hell out!!!!

Answer 6

The Vietnamese didn't want to be free so they have to pay the price after we left 58,000 dead there. I support the war in Iraq because the issues are quite different (the WTC was being built in 1968, not attacked) but I still hope that the Iraqis will step up for themselves and take the fight to the enemy.


EDIT - Hey Booger Nose - thanks for your service in Vietnam (and for your son in Iraq - thankfully we have Americans who will stand up and fight) However that doesn't disqualify me from giving my opinion so your callous statements should be handled with scorn. HAVE A NICE LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 7

Vietnam was a doomed venture from the start because of the goal we had going in. The goal was to stop the spread of communism. Okay, seems logical, but how do you quantify success for that goal? You can't, because your goal has to be more concise. There was no benchmark for success, no way to tell friend from enemy, and no exit strategy. We didn't know who our friends were in that one. We didn't cut and run in Vietnam, we recognized that Kennedy's paranoia and McNamera's obsessive need for control were a poor foundation for international intervention policy. We saw a losing battle and no way to really stop the inevitable spread of communism in a region that was seemingly incapable of governing itself responsibly.

Now Iraq ... the goal in Iraq is different. We're not trying to stop the spread of political ideology. We are trying to help a nation of people establish a sustainable democracy. We are not trying to win a war in Iraq right now, that is simple misinformation. The goal in Iraq is to help the newly formed government hold some semblance of order together long enough for them to get their feet under them. At the point that they can control the insurgency themselves, we will be able to pull our troops out of there. We will still have a presence in the region for decades, just like we had in Europe until a couple of years ago. Iraq is a central lynchpin in the war on terror, not because Iraq was the biggest terrorist factory, but because it is a sizeable puzzle piece in a region dominated by political instability. If we can establish sustainable democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq, then we'll have strong regional allies to aid the cause. Additionally, we'll have more stable forward operating bases and better resource pools from which to draw in the region. If those two countries can get their democratic stuff together, they will also pose a great model of modern government and individual freedom to people in the region who have known nothing but clerical rule for their entire lives.

This is not a simple war. This is a foundation for future peace. Terrorists, especially the kind we're dealing with now, will not stop operating because we leave the region. They flew two airplanes in to the World Trade Center, flew one into the Pentagon, tried to fly one into another DC area target, blew up a US warship (USS Cole), blew up three US embassies in Africa, blew up a car bomb in the World Trade Center, hijacked countless commercial airline flights, kidnapped Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics, and so much more well before we had a single troop in Iraq. Their goal is the death of Americans. We can't fight that by holing up in our houses and hoping they go away, that hasn't worked in the past and it won't work now. Look at how Carter/Clinton policies failed so miserable in North Korea. Do you think they developed nukes because of Bush? They have been working on nukes since the mid-1970s.

We don't have a choice anymore, we have to be strong and be willing to stand in the face of the storm to make sure our descendents are able to enjoy the freedoms we so often take for granted. We don't need to pull out of Iraq now to honor the deaths of those who have fallen there, we need to finish the job so that they did not die in vain. We sully their sacrifice by retreating in their name, they would never do that to us. It makes me sick to hear the talk in DC about giving up and coming home before we're done.

Answer 8

You would not have won in Vietnam if you stayed 300 years.
Likewise you will not win in Iraq.Fact is you are not wanted.There is a current thought that if the coalition forces left Iraq things would get better.Whether that's true or not I don't know.

Answer 9

Yes

Answer 10

We might've won in Vietnam if the Democrats had kept their noses in Washington, given their field commanders a clear objective, and let them do their jobs. Attempted micro-management lost that war for us, not to mention South Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and the rest of SouthEast Asia.

As for what's going to happen in the Middle East? Time will tell. Bush seems to be content to let the field commanders do their jobs without too much interference beyond reminding them of their objective now & then. And remember, according to Zarkawi's (sp?) notes the insurgents are becoming weary of the conflict, and the Iraqi civilians are getting tired of the insurgents constant attacks against the populace & infrastructure. Victory is a matter of effort, time & patience - not Democrat & Liberal demands.