Is the so called "war" in Iraq another Vietnam?

Answer 1

Very similar on a lot of levels
But, considerably different on one major series of points----
with Vietnam there WAS a definable enemy AND a definable objective AND a centralized location OF the opposition !!
All of these points made Vietnam considerably easier as a
Focused and Target-able engagement --- none of these points exist within Iraq which makes it even less likely to see
a definable and clear "end point" !!!!

Answer 2

Why is this in the "physics" category?
Shouldn't it be in "politics" instead?
But to answer your question: not really.
In VietNam, the battle was ideological. One knew who was on the good side and who was on the bad, as it was clear that the North wanted to invade the South to impose its view on the rest.
Iraq is far worse as
1- the war was started under false pretenses (there were no weapons of mass destruction there, the Bush administration lied trough its teeth)
2- the civil unrest and bomb planting involves factions that spread throughout the country, and all of those factions would gladly attack American forces as well as hitting the civilians
3- pulling out would not settle the issue, as, unlike VietNam where the North forces were capable of establishing themselves as uncontested ruler of the country, there is no organism capable of putting the warring faction at rest and impose some equilibrium.

Let's just say this is a fine mess Bush and Cheney have put the USA in. But they don't care, as their little friends in Haliburton get all the oil in Iraq, and all the contracts to provide services over there.

Answer 3

Yeah, this isn't a physics question. A point worth noting about the war, is that allied casualties aren't anything even approaching what they were in Vietnam. By that measure at least, things are going much better in Iraq.

Answer 4

I THINK SO ALL WE ARE DOING IS REALLY POLICE ACTION SAME AS VIETNAM