2006-12-25 15:29:06 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes AND no!
Yes- From a perspective that we are engaged in a guerrilla war against an enemy willing to sacrifice themselves in droves.
No- From a perspective of the enemy. In Vietnam, the enemy was N. Vietnam, completely united under the command of Ho Chi Mihn. In Iraq, it's multiple factions of terrorists who are killing each other as much as our own forces.
2006-12-25 15:44:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I pronounced in the beginning up that this became going to be yet another Vietnam. It has a brilliant form of a similar features: Vietnam had Jungle war Iraq has city war. the two a similar with one difference one became in the jungle and not the city. Iraq has the aptitude to earnings as long as we remember why we are there and that's the individuals. i think of that the only element that we don't understand is that we in the united states of a are so lots greater in threat then human beings understand and that's because of the fact each and all the armed forces bases are working on skeleton crews. i can talk in this as i'm a USMC Vet. whilst speaking to my pals that are nonetheless in talk appropriate to the bases that i became at like MCAS Cherry Pt, they say that all and sundry it may take could be one sturdy calculated simultaneous act of terrorism and the united states of a could have a severe difficulty. the armed forces as an entire is severe depleted and it somewhat is having a no longer uncomplicated time assembly the recruiting numbers. So whilst that occurs we get the involuntary extensions and recollects. So definite in a feeling it somewhat is the recent Vietnam.
2016-10-28 09:07:25 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not yet. 50,000 American men were killed in Vietnam, and Iraq has a LONG way to go before it gets to that rate. I think we had what, 2 or 3 thousand killed so far? It would take 25 years for us to reach the level of Vietnam.
Iraq isn't even a war. It's just a few thugs blowing things up. We're just trying to stop them from doing that so that Iraq can become a progressive free thinking modern democracy.
Love jack
2006-12-25 15:44:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, there's a crucial difference. Bush had a plan to get out of the Vietnam War.
2006-12-25 19:41:57 · answer #4 · answered by Red Herring 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Vietnam was far bloodier and left a huge body count. Iraq could be..at best..a mini Vietnam, but that is not much of a cons elation
2006-12-25 15:32:46 · answer #5 · answered by fade_this_rally 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It could be. In Vietnam, our enemies fought a 4th generation war and we tried to counter it by fighting a second generation war. That cannot work. Our current enemies fight a 4th generation war with less ablility to convert to 2d generation fighting (Mao's 3d phase), and we now, I hope, know not to use 2d generation warfare to counter it unless they convert to the same.
2006-12-25 21:33:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is as pointless as the Vietnam war
2006-12-25 15:31:39 · answer #7 · answered by A nobody 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It may well turn out that way if your question and the numerous similar questions are an indication of your support for the war on terror.
Our strength clearly lies in this country remaining The UNITED States of America.
2006-12-25 16:21:03 · answer #8 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Getting to look like it. We need to turn up the heat some and shake things loose. Its got be demoralizing for our troops see their comrades in arms blown up by bombs it's time for some real payback, let em loose i say
2006-12-26 08:10:10 · answer #9 · answered by L J 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Due to liberals demoralizing our soldiers and aiding and abetting the enemy with demonic words we are going to lose in Iraq just as we did in Vietnam. Thanks libs.
2006-12-25 15:40:57 · answer #10 · answered by Timothy M 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋