What are the real similarities between today's war in Iraq and Vietnam?

Question

I want to hear from people who really buy into this notion that Iraq is but another Vietnam. As far as I can tell, the only similiarity is that we have troops coming home and getting spit on. Care to name any other similiarities? Particularly real ones you didn't have to make up?

Edge Caliber, if you're a child molestor that's going on television posing as a former Navy Seal when you're not, just so a political party can use you to its advantage, then that does make you a phony. That's Rush's point. Not that the military as a whole is phony, why on Earth would a support of the war even say that and what's more, why would opponents of the war be so offended? The military's been called worse things by people on the left who MEAN it and don't have to be taken out of context, are you offened by them?

Update (5:59 pm) : There have been a lot of answers comparing Iraq and Vietnam only by calling them "quaqmires" but what are your real grounds for saying this of Iraq? A place where schools have opened, elections have taken place, and most importantly, the number of American deaths doesn't amount to so much a bloodbath as Vietnam, so is it at all fair to compare the two?

Answer 1

The only real similarity is that the Dumocrats want to cut and run, allowing the enemy to grab victory out of the jaws of defeat.
Bush won't let them get away with it, so they hate him.

Answer 2

It's the politicians; there are different politicians, and persons who want peace have spoken up long before to place the responsibility where it belongs. There is no blaming persons who were chosen from a "lottery machine" for the decisions of the echelons.

If there were a draft; the response may have been overwhelminging, in favor of ending the war sooner, but this reflects more of a 'kinder, gentler America'.
Let me say this: I am a peace activist, and I have about 2 Vietnam vets who stand behind me at any peace rally. They got spat on a long time ago. That doesn't happen today.

ps: it's not just the left, but also an unresponsive right as well.

Answer 3

I think it depends on how long it goes and the outcome. It seems were now involved in a civil war which is what Vietnam was. It also seems like be may not have a clear cut victory like Vietnam. Both were also wars that were very controversial with very passionate people on both sides of the argument.

Answer 4

The main similarity is that the American people have shown once again that they are truly a product of the MTV era and anything that can not be done and wrapped up in an hour is not worth doing at all. We, as a nation, have once again shown that we are not willing to commit to any long-term, difficult course of action. Long-term does NOT mean lasting over a week, by the way. It means possibly decades.

We are so wrapped up in the pleasures of the moment that we have lost all commitment to the future if it requires real work.

Answer 5

Both were entered into under false pretenses. In Vietnam it was the staged Gulf of Tonkin affair. In Iraq it was the imaginary WMD's.

Both were unpopular at home. People supported Bush initially, but that support has waned as we see no end to the conflict and are learning how he hoodwinked us into the war.

Both had no clear enemy. In Vietnam we were attacked by the North Vietnamese, the Viet Cong, and even rogue elements of the South Vietnamese army. In Iraq it's the various religous factions, Al Qaeda, insurgents, and anyone else capable of holding a rifle.

Both appeared to benefit American corporations, who stand to gain from a prolonged conflict, not a swift victory. There is ample evidence that the hundreds of billions of dollars spent in Iraq are coming home to a handful of U.S. companies - only a few of which make the news.

Both become a problem for the succeeding president, not the one who started the mess.

In both cases, the president told us this was necessary. Vietnam was necessary to stop the spread of communism (the flawed domino theory), while Iraq is supposed to be where we fight terrorists, "so we don't have to fight them here."

Need more?

Answer 6

The only similarity which I see is Democrats disregard for the troops, so that they can gain some political advantage.
Both in Vietnam and in Iraq, they encouraged the enemy to hold on longer. The result of that is needless loss of American lives.
People that would do that are clearly scum sucking bottom feeders, or as Ann Coulter would say, "the spawn of Satan."

Answer 7

Nobody is spitting on our troops.
- We don't really have the support of the locals, even though they may be worse off without us.
- The government of the country we are helping is a puppet that relies on US troops for protection from their own people.
- Our troops are facing guerrilla tactics.
- There is little support from the young people who must fight the war, and troop levels must be kept up by forced service - in the case of Vietnam, the draft, in the case of Iraq, the utilization of the National Guard as active military and the stop-loss prevention of those who have fulfilled their obligation from leaving service.

Answer 8

We left Vietnam because this country became convinced that we were the bad guys. Our troops were mistreated at home and there was a great deal of propaganda about it not being our war.
This time, we are carefully being nice to our troops, but we are willing to destroy them for real or imagined misconduct in the war. Its very easy to sit in front of our TVs and judge them for responding badly to any given situation in which they find themselves.
We went to Viet Nam in order to prevent the spread of Communism. We are in Iraq in order to secure our interests in the area, (oil) Both of these reasons have to do with preserving our way of life. There is a price to pay for anything that is valuable to us, I think that our way of life qualifies.
After we left Vietnam, the boat people happened, the Communists took over and killed the people who were depending on us, and Cambodia happened, The worst Holocaust in recent history. 13 million killed. But we could congratulate ourselves that we had gotten out of there and we were no longer participating in an illegal war.
It remains to be seen what will happen when and if we pull out of Iraq, but I don't want to be responsible, even indirectly for another Cambodia.

Answer 9

The cong were supported by Russia and China : FILL IN THE BLANK are being supported by Iran and Syria

Our biggest weakness is still our lack of political will. As it was then we now have half of our country's Senior leadership calling for a immediate pull out.

We are fighting an enemy that blends itself into a the civilian population as it was in Nam.

Similarities yes, same outcome? Well the election of 08 will determine that. (see what i mean about political will?)

Answer 10

no foreseeable exit possible each day we are dug in deeper, weapons sold to the puppet regime disappear and end up use against us, massive humanitarian nightmare of displaced persons, massive spending without accountability, troop loses increasing over the long haul, few pitched battles and fewer distinct victories, Troops frustrated and set in static positions, operation from fortified hamlets, the day belongs to us, the night them. some of the many similarities.

Answer 11

Name one time during this war when troops came home and were spit on (besides being figuratively spit on by Rush Limbaugh).

Liberals support the troops. They don't support the guy in charge of them.