When we allow military leaders to call the missions and make the field decisions our military cannot be defeated. Unfortunately, in vietnam, the politicians began making decisions regarding how and where we would fight. They assigned missions such as linebacker 1 & 2 and placed severe limitations on our ability to strike our enemies on their home ground. As long as we can keep the politicians from making military decisions we wont have a problem. The difficulty I see is that congress is once again trying to legislate the battlefield. Vietnam proved that you cannot run a war by comittee. Unfortunately, our leaders are seldom good historians and have not learned the lessons of history. Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. My brother was killed in Afganistan on this past monday. He told us that what they were doing was important and that they were having a positive impact. For his sake, and the sake of all of those brave young men and women who have given their lives in this war on terror, I hope you are wrong. I hope we have learned from Vietnam and that we have the conviction to finish what we started. Regardless of the reason we went in, we must now finish this conflict in a manner that leaves the people in the mideast in as good or better shape that we found them in. It would be irresponsible to "bug out" and leave them to civil war, famine, and death.
2007-07-12 05:09:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Not at all! This Iraqi fiasco will leave the world a much more dangerous place. Vietnam was not geopolitically important- it was important mostly so that we could show that the Soviets couldn't go around committing proxy wars without a response from us. Once we left and the Communists took control of the whole country, what really changed in the world because of it. Not much. Whereas with Iraq, we have created a huge number of insurgents and have likely added fuel to the fire of many people around the world who would like to do harm to America. I think we're creating a much more dangerous situation with Iraq than we did with Vietnam.
2007-07-12 06:11:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by jtkb1 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with Dan.
Actually Vietnam and Iraq are not even the same type of war.
We are in Iraq because our Country was invaded by terrorists. Declaration of Independence clearly states that we have a fight to defend our country when it is invaded.
There will be a lot achieved if we would just support our Troops and our Country, and that, includes support of our President. I expect to get hate mail but I am sick and tired of people running down a President. It really makes us look bad bad bad to the enemy.
2007-07-12 06:44:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by makeitright 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think little will be achieved for the U.S., but there will be a major difference between what vietnam ended up as & what will happen in iraq - i really believe that eventually we'll pull our troops out & iran will become more & more involved in iraq - iraq & iran have ancient hatreds that go back centuries & so it will be interesting to see how iran handles this - eventually they'll probably both wind up with somewhat more moderate govts than they now have (iraq has an incompetent, dishonest mess for a govt) - we need to let people work out their own messes sometimes - if we're so worried about despots treating their people terribly, how about africa? now there's a region that's a big mess waiting to explode - why not invade sudan or zimbabwe? there's no oil there, that's why -
2007-07-12 05:20:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ashara 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Little achieved???
Look at all the technological progress that came out of Vietnam... All of todays technology was due to government funding to Boeing, and other companies, during and after Vietnam...
We have the best military equipment in the world, so I highly doubt little was achieved. Just imagine what our equipment will be like in 20 years.....
2007-07-12 04:58:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hopefully, the number of troops killed in Vietnam won't be repeated in Iraq. Remember Operation Desert Storm? Even though there were not as many deaths, most of the deaths were caused by friendly fire.
2007-07-12 05:17:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The one thing that the two wars have in common is the fact that the we are running from a conflict we can win.
The American Public just doesn't have the stomach for long wars and casualties. Al Queda has been saying this for years. It seems they are right about us in this regard.
2007-07-12 05:13:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by macDBH 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Iraq will be much much worseThe USA will not recover from the humiliation this century.
2007-07-12 05:49:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Saddams gone, his Army is gone, and there are no WMD or any threat possible in Iraq whatsoever; that much is acheived.
2007-07-12 04:57:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Absolutely.
I just hope we can get our young soldiers out of there before the death toll reaches 58,000.
2007-07-12 06:15:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋