100 years from now, when historians look back, which war will be worse: Vietnam or Iraq?

Question

When we compare the Iraq War and the Vietnam War, I think Iraq might be a worse mark on American history. Of course, many, many more people were killed in Vietnam. But Iraq has caused all sorts of civilian deaths, and it was a war that was devised on premises that were pretty much false.

Its true that Iraq did refuse to allow U.N inspections, but the intelligence may have been manipulated or mischaracterized by the White House. And it was this intelligence that led to the decision to go to war. The planning itself for the war was, obviously, deeply flawed. Nobody in the White House listened to those who said the 'the peace' would take so long to win, or be so costly in both lives, time, and money.

So I ask you, which of these two wars will be the greater opprobrium in American history, and why?

Answer 1

Your kidding right?

Its apples and oranges...

how could Iraq ever be compared to Vietnam?

Vietnam's death rates both civilian and military are far higher then it has been or will be in Iraq. there is no question about that.

I am just flabbergasted that people can even conceive that some how the two situations are even similar.

No I am not just flabbergasted I am insulted!

Please do your self a favor and stop listening to the far loony left that feel the urge to compare everything to Vietnam, hell I bet there are some who would say ww2 was like Vietnam, the revolution was like Vietnam, hell the Trojan war was like Vietnam.

The only thing that was like Vietnam was... Vietnam!

if anything this will go down in history as a war that was a mistake, much like how the Mexican-American war is regarded by most historians today.

Vietnam, the casualties rates for one month were closer to the casualties we have seen in 4 years in Iraq. Vietnam we were facing an enemy Army that attacked military targets, Iraq we are facing small rebel bands who target civilians. Vietnam we had almost complete freedom to bomb, in Iraq nearly every target has to be considered for possible civilian casualties.

PLEASE consider these things before ever making a comment like that again. You can be against Iraq, but don't be a drone and think that by connecting the two wars together some how it proves something.

It doesn't.

Answer 2

First of all don't forget about the civilian deaths caused by the Viet Cong and the NVA during the Vietnam war. The communists did some very nasty stuff back then that seems to have been forgotten about.

Saddam did have and did use WMDs. That is fact. Most of the world's intelligence agencies believed he still had them. It may be a suprise to some but most of those agencies are not puppets of the American gov't. Besides, WMDs were not the only reason for the war. The war in Iraq is much more legitimate than any combat action the US has been involved with since Korea.

It is just not possible to answer your question yet because Iraq hasn't been played out. Vietnam has an important place because it took place when American culture was going through great change. Iraq could turn out to be nothing more than a paragraph if things just smooth out but democracy doesn't spread or it could turn out to be a whole book if the place is left in chaos and it becomes the center for a new Islamic incursion into western Europe. Ask again in 10 years.

Answer 3

I think that all wars are bad, if there are really good leaders, the first thing a good leader is to fix things without war. Vietnam was very bad but at that time the United States was also setting up an example for all Asia, which could have been a real threat to this country, in the case of Irak, the Bushes went after a men who was a real problem for the oil industry, the world economy and the Middle East. Well, that men was captured in a hole, hanged 2 weeks ago and we are still trying to send more Americans to die, kill more innocent people and spend the money we do not have. The only shame people will remember is all the idiots who supported Bush, people who want a war but are not going to fight, people who may be out there but have no other skills, no purpose in life. If there was a real vote of people who are really willing to die and really go to Irak and pay out of their own pocket the expenses, I bet there will be less than 100 people in America who will go to Irak, more than half mentally ill for real. Irak war was produced by creating lies, by making us Americans look like clowns, by going over the House, the senate, the entire Nation because of one men who wants to keep stealing the oil of a nation who was supposed to be free more than a year ago. We have real issues in this country and we may use all those Bush supportes to fix those issues such as education, health, taxes, crime, secure the borders, just to name a few, Irak next to Bush and a laughing Osama is what history will remember as the worst ever!!

Answer 4

That's why we have the phrase "100 years from now," isn't it? There were 3 or 4 opportunities to win in Vietnam that were squandered by those who cried doom and gloom when we had significant advantages, such as after the Tet battles of 1968, and we can be pessimistic now. It seems enough people have a negative opinion to force a negative outcome, but that's a choice we make, and history will not blame Mr. Bush if we choose to lose.

Answer 5

Vietnam. There is a major difference between the two. If America loses, there will be big trouble in that the US allowed a base for Al Qaeda operations with an oil rich country. If America wins, it would be a huge blow to Al Qaeda and might even drive the remaining Al Qaeda members to Africa or Palestine.

Al Qaeda may have not been there at the beginning, but they are there now and realizing they can not lose

Answer 6

From a human stand point, both of these wars are horrible. But human throughout the history had always tried to kill each other....i would say 100 from now, Jehovah God's battle of Armageddon against this wicked system of things would not only be the most destructive war ever waged against wicked mankind, but also the single most decisive and powerful battle in the history of Human civilization.

Answer 7

Vietnam

Answer 8

Vietnam. A lot of really good soldiers died for nothing. There was just a lot of deaths but no commitment. When the powers that be decided to quit, there was just a major exodus and nothing accomplished.

Answer 9

You pretty much summed it up, nothing much to add. But I don't think either war will make a big impact on history, there is a far bigger and more deadly one going on in Africa, although since there is no oil or gold involved we don't hear about it much. Millions of people are dying in the genocide there, nobody gives a hoot.

Answer 10

I think that they will have to conclude that the Iraq War will be considered to be worse. Why because it was one of the first wars in modern times to be clearly started and fought for profits by and for a corporation.