http://youtube.com/watch?v=_5npYWfRlkw
Skip to 1:30 if you wan to get to the point.
Kurtz is trying to say how in war, to defeat a ruthless enemy you must be just as ruthless, but that will never happen because US troops in Iraq will never use the same tactics as the insurgents, because as he explains, "It is judgement that defeats us."
It is judgement that will defeat the US in Iraq. US troops cannot use the same ruthless tactics because of the judgement of the American people.
2007-06-12 12:34:16 · 7 answers · asked by ThatOneDude 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I read many comparisons to Iraq and Viet Nam.
1. The Allied Forces won the TET offensive militarily. The NVA won politically.
2. The TET offensive is when Walter Cronkite went on the air and declared the war lost.
I know many Vietnamese. One was a Major ARVN 1955-1975. They don't seem to see the comparison. But what could they possibly know about what happened there. Everyone of them supports the complete removal of John Kerry's manhood too. They were a little more descriptive.
Back to your question. Go to the link. Read the stories written by people that were there. Read all you can about who the NVA attribute their win to at other sites as well. One General claimed our own freedoms defeated us. Find who's pictures hang as a tribute in Hanoi.
When you see a bumper sticker that states "We were winning when I left" that guy knows the truth as well. Ask him.
It is difficult to fight insurgents. Viet Nam proved we did not have to sink , at least completly, to their level. Again at the time of TET the NVA were freaking desperate and virtually at the end of the line. As bungled as many have said our tactics were we were winning. Winning without a front line is hard to see. Pitting us against each other is a proven technique.
2007-06-12 13:40:35 · answer #1 · answered by Stand-up philosopher. It's good to be the King 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If that is true it just underscores why going to war should only be the absolute last resort. Usually this is when your very existance is in peril. Not when there is a hypothetical chance that someone might somehow be thinking about gathering the weapons necessary to perhaps maybe use them against you at some undefined time in the distant future.
And thanks to Farron T for making your point.
2007-06-12 19:55:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You do realize that Kurtz is insane and that Apocalypse Now is a movie that takes a fairly harsh view of American interventionalism?
2007-06-12 19:45:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Same as our justice system, the criminal has more rights than anyone else.
That is why there needs to be just one strong Iraqi to stand up so we can hand it over and let them get the treatment they deserve
2007-06-12 19:42:59 · answer #4 · answered by Father Ted 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
N O, This applies only to the Vietnam War!!!
2007-06-12 19:43:52 · answer #5 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bingo you get the prize! We will persevere though!
2007-06-12 19:39:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
we have a BINGO........if we want to win this war forget the smart bombs and use the carpet bombs. you blow enough of them up and they'll stop there sh*t fast........
2007-06-12 19:40:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋