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

1) Both are/were limited wars (US never invaded N. Vietnam).

2) Both are/were major insurgent/guerrilla wars

3) Booby traps/IEDs cause/caused major US causlities

4) Both had/have civil wars that the US troops were caught right in the middle of.

5) US troops could never quite do well enough at counter insurgency to win the war(s).

6) Never seemed to have enough troops or time to win.

7) Had an aggressive Texan as President who could never admit he was wrong about anything.

8) Tried to push Democracy but it never really worked.

9) Never won the "hearts & minds" of the civilian population (Major mistake)

10) Totally divided the American people in such a horrible way that it was almost worse than the war(s) themselves.

2007-01-26 13:11:43 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

4 answers

they kept sending "troop surges" depsite low popular opinion

2007-01-27 03:34:37 · answer #1 · answered by plant a tree 4 · 0 0

They are not the same in any way. The casualties for the Vietnam war were almost 60,000 in 8 or 10 years. At the same rate we would have already lost over 20,000 in Iraq we haven't.

The U.S. troops in Vietnam crushed the insurgency. During the Tet offensive the Viet Cong were virtually wiped out. From that point forward they were no longer an effective and the remaining part of the war was fought by North Vietnamese infiltrators.

The only thing that is similar is that groups within the United State were invested in the military defeat of the U.S. army. They applied political pressure to pull out the troops and abandon the fight.

The Vietnamese were not and had not threatened the United States. Sadam was and did.

The lesson which should have been learned in Vietnam was that to allow our enemies no sanctuary, as Laos, North Vietnam, and Cambodia. And now in Syria, Pakistan, and Iran.

LBJ micro managed the war from Washington, with his whiz kid staff actually selecting bombing targets and routes planes were to fly. LBJ threw his hands up and did not run for re-election.

2007-01-26 21:42:02 · answer #2 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 0 0

The soldiers fight and die to gain ground and then give it back without a fight. There is no real way to identify who the enemy really is. The news never talks about the good things that we are doing over there and how we are making a difference. They only talk about the bad things, which makes much of the public doubt whether or not we should really be there.

2007-01-27 20:56:23 · answer #3 · answered by kenny_1745 2 · 0 0

The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that the Vietnam was war was unnecessary and in Iraq, progress is happening as the country moves toward democracy. You can hear the TRUTH on The 700 Club (Christian Broadcasting Network) and FOX News and NOT ON THE LIBERAL "LYING" MEDIA.

2007-01-26 21:31:40 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers