what do vietnam and iraq war have in common?

Question

I need help..the stuff i have is they have no exit strategy, bad leaders what can i write about this? How will i start my intro?
COmpare/contrast essay

Does this sound good.
In today's world we're facing the same troubles in iraq and the same troubles we faced years ago in vietnam???

the war back then..I odn't know nothing about war.

did they have bad leaders? Why did they go to war tho?

I meant do vietnam and iraq have bad leaders? is al qaeda and viet cong enemies? WHY?

Answer 1

Simple fact, we lost their hearts and minds. In Vietnam most of the people simply wanted to go about their business and feed their familys etc, but both sides keep sweeping through..US during daylight, the other guys at night. We became part of the problem. We did not start out that way. Sometimes you reach a point where you have to admit that we have become part of the problem. When we left vietnam there was a lot of turmoil. The good news...Our soldiers were no longer a part of it.

Things have settled down there now. If we stayed there I'm sure that would be true.

A lot of people want us to continue on in Iraq. I'm not sure we can accomplish anything there anymore. We seem to have become a part of the problem.

WHy are our allies pulling out on us? Maybe we should listen to them!

Answer 2

OK, Exit strategy, why have an "Exit Strategy" in the first place. You go in achieve victory and occupy or leave. Exit strategy is for sissies. Bad leaders? I think our leaders have done a fine job.
What you could write on is the winning strategy of pinning Al Qaeda down in Iraq. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization and terrorism is all about public relations. They have to concentrate their resources in Iraq. They are under the spotlight from the rest of the muslim world.
The muslim world expects Al Qaeda to defend it from the United States. So, Iraq ends up Al Qaeda's quagmire, not ours. They are stuck in Iraq like Brer Fox on the Tar Baby.

There is one similarity between the war in Vietnam and the current war in Iraq, that's the protesters, the media and the politicians opposing the war. During the Tet offensive of 1968 in Vietnam, the communists suffered a major defeat and were planning to get the best peace deal they could. Then the protesters and then top news anchor Walter Cronkite told the American people that the US lost the battle and that the war couldn't be won. General Vo Nguyen Giap, commander of the NVA asked the civillian North Vietnamese to reconsider a peace deal and continue fighting. They won. The democratic Republic of Vietnam was invaded and taken over in 1975. The communists lost the military battle but timid sissies back home handed them the victory. We have those same worthless scumbags here and now doing the same thing, they're called Democrats.
To cite my source on General Giap, I suggest you review the documentary "The 10,000 day war" where General Giap himself states that in an interview.
That is the only similarity between Vietnam and Iraq.

Answer 3

No not much in common. In Vietnam we were facing a well trained well led highly motived and determined enemy with a well defined command structure. Their generals were avid students of military history. Their Generals were also battle hardened Veterans of the wars against the French and Japanese. It was called IndoChina then.
They had earned the nickname "The Prussians of the Far East" long before America got involved..

The reason both Russia and China were supporting Vietnam was Russia and China at that time were fighting a border war along their borders with each other off and on. .
Neither one wanted the Vietnamese to Allie with the other side. Russia because they knew of the Vietnamese reputation in war and didn't want to fight them if they allied with the Chinese. China because they feared the Vietnamese allying with the Russians on their Southern flank if it developed into an all out shooting war between them and the Russians.
A good example why was when Vietnam invaded Cambodia The Chinese in turn invaded Vietnam because Cambodia was a Chinese Allie. The Chinese managed to drive a lttle over thirty miles into Vietnam before Vietnam could disenaged it's armour from Cambodia and counter attack. Two weeks later Vietnam's armoured units were already over fifty miles inside China and driving deeper inside China. They had already routed the Chinese army and armoured units. China started wanting talks suing for peace.

That was the kind of enemy we were facing in Vietnam. They were not a bunch of rag=tag rice farmers like was commonly believed..

Answer 4

I think you are missing a significant point. The common denominator between those two wars is that the politicians tried to fight it --- with the same result. Once a war is underway, the best thing a politician can do is to step back and let the army do their thing. The politicians know little enough about everything else but seem unwilling to keep their hands off something they know absolutely nothing about. If the politicians had not stopped the army after the first Iraqui war, we would not have the problems we have. If the politicians had not demobbed the Iraqui army, creating a vast unemployed but armed mob, we would not have the problems we have. If the politicians had not tried to fight the war on the cheap with too few troops we would not have the problems we have. With all of the political meddling going on, it is impossible to answer your original question about the quality of the army or their tactics. They never got a chance to use them --- if they had fought the politicians they would have been retired, so most of them didn't.

Answer 5

Same in both wars:

Anti-war protestors and Politicians using them to gain votes while calling for our own defeat.

The above moralizing the enemy.

The military winning every battle.

Good Generals.

Congress getting in the way, preventing the military from doing its job.

Media bias against the soldiers, military and mission.

False allegations of atrocities against the military and our troops.

Contrast:
A president that stays out of trying to play general.
In VietNam, the Administration told the military how and where to conduct battle.

Answer 6

The commonality's associated with these two conflicts are primarily associated with reliable economies.What resulted was an influx of Vietnamese to this country.how many mid eastern peoples will emigrate here has not been established yet.My community already shows a substantial influx. 56% of Hawaii's oil comes directly from Vietnam.What will the economic value from Iraq be?Another comonality has been the inability of non military industrys to make significant progress-for all partys concerned.The disproportionate values are plainly exibited and continue to develop.

Answer 7

both these wars were designed to be sustained not won. if we wanted to win in iraq then dont you think that the bush admin. would change its statagy?? all they do is the same. we have the result that they want. a sustained war.
as in vietnam we will have to pull out or just stay at war forever. do your own research there are to many people that think war is good for this country, to many that think they are in a pissing contest, notice they only give the same reason for staying "sissies", "liberal hate us", "support for the enemy". these are not reasons, these are ignorant statements by people that are afraid to truely support the troops by serving beside them.

Answer 8

Hon, what happened in Vietnam was that it was a highly politicized police action. The country took out its angst on the soldiers and used mistakes as jumping off points to judge the soldiers. The pa was due to BIG BUSINESS and because Vietnam had natural resources that we wanted to keep out of th hands of the Communists. We failed because the pa was never declared a war and we could not engage the enemy as we needed to to win any confrontations.

We couldn't tell who the enemy was over in Vietnam, a cute little baby could be concealing a grenade in his/her diaper because life was cheap over there.

Hon, any other direct questions, just e-mail me.

Answer 9

THE POLITICIANS ARE RUNNING THE WAR INSTEAD OF THE MILITARY.THE GENERALS ARE BEING SECOND GUESSED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT EVEN OVER THERE.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A EXIT STRATEGY,YOU DO THE JOB TILL ITS DONE.YOU DON T CUT AND RUN,WHEN IT DOES NOT GO AS FAST AS YOU WANT IT TO.
DURING WW2 THE GENERALS WERE GIVEN THEIR ORDERS.RECAPTURE OCCUPIED AREAS AND DRIVE BACK THE ENEMY. CRUSH THE ENEMY AND EXCEPT NOTHING BUT UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER.AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS DONE.
WE DID NOT CARE WHAT THE WORLD OPINION WAS.WE DID WHAT WE HAD TO DO.

Answer 10

Both of the war we didn't need to be involve. it didn't have nothing to do with us because it was their war. now we are there longer then we think just like the Vietnam one. And also we're starting to send people back.