Why am I reading stories about Iraq and I'm thinking "Vietnam"

[LynneSin]

We've "declared" a victory in Vietnam and yet more of our soldiers are getting killed each day. Today I'm reading about the UN HQ that was bombed.

I'm reading about Iraq and I'm getting this sinking feeling of "Vietnam". Should we be worried, I think we're repeating history again. A questionable war and a country that isn't ready to give up.

Are we smelling the Fresh Napalm in the morning once again?

[quinnox]

1. Nah

I don't think it is comparable to that. The U.S. lost tens of thousands in that war, they have lost maybe 200-300 in this one so far. If Bush is booted out, then the Dem will bring an end to this mess as best as he can. If bush is re-elected, then I would start worrying.

[LynneSin]

4. Vietnam lasted for many years

We've only hit a few months - what I'm worried about is this war will develop into another Vietnam, but not quite there yet!

[Brian Sweat]

8. The Iraqis are paying us well for teaching them to fight,

when they had no desire for it in the first place and no skill either.

[diamondsoul]

7. WTH do casualties have to do with it??

You think the numbers of dead make a damned bit of difference to the people living in the middle of this war?

Do you think the horrors they will deal with are any less because not as many of their colleagues have died YET? Do you think they are any less worried about when the fuck they can come home than their predecessors were? Do you maybe think they aren't suffering the self-same affects that any 'Nam vet can drescribe in vivid detail?

WTH? The whole god-damned mess is almost identical to Viet Nam! the sole differences are length of the combat at this point (and that won't last long because even if the Dems manage to oust Bush it's going to take a good year to get the UN in and us out) and the numbers of the dead which are rising every damned day!

That's just sick. It's not as bad because we haven't lost as much cannon fodder. PLEASE!

[quinnox]

14. Appreciate the passion but

I disagree on the numbers. Wars are measured different ways, and one is by numbers. That's fact. And I see no similarities between Iraq and Vietnam.

[diamondsoul]

25. Odd-

You're the only one on the thread so far that I've seen give any importance at all to numbers of dead Americans. The rest of us seems to be discussing the smilarities between the confrontations (or lack thereof), the guerilla warfare and the total absence of an exit strategy.

Damn, sounds like 'Nam to me!

[LynneSin]

28. Quinnox: it's not a Vietnam, but starting to head that direction

I think you have a very valid point and maybe my post was somewhat misleading.

Iraq has not reached Vietnam numbers, but I guess what I'm seeing is something similiar to how Vietnam start: A War based on lies and a country who really doesn't want us there in the first place (and I think one poster commented about how we have a country where we can't tell our friends from the enemy).

My purpose of this post; I suppose, is to make people aware that we need to do something to prevent the proverbial "Another Vietnam". Personally I DON'T want that many people dead and we clearly do not have the money to spend that many years there. Iraq is NOT a Vietnam, but it sure could turn into one if we allow Bush to do so!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

2. Iragnam

[Aidoneus]

3. eh

if there is the need for a comparison, there's a couple better ones I think-- Iraq 1920, Lebanon 1982..

[diamondsoul]

5. I hate to say it, but

I've been predicting exactly that since the first mention was made of using force in Iraq. YES, hon, we're watching Viet Nam played out again right before our eyes. The same hellish situation for our troops, the same never being able to tell enemy from friendly because the locals are desperate, the same bullshit propaganda in the news ostensibly to keep morale up, and the same non-answers about when the troops can get the hell out of, well HELL!

It's dejavou(sp?) for a damned lot of people and that sickens me almost as much as the war itself. Not only do we have a whole new set of victims, but we're reopening and salting the wounds of victims who have were just being able to enjoy being alive again.

I'm no strategist, but even I can sit here and list hundreds of very BAD choices on the part of the people running this god-forsaken folly. That in itself is frightening.

[mrbill]

6. it's viet nam in the sand this time

a blind man could have seen this one coming down the street.

on edit: brown and root is a common denominator

[Breezy du Nord]

9. Ther was a good article in the Strib about it

give me a minute, I'll find it. I think it was in newsday too.

edit: here it is:

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/4042726.html



James L. Larocca: Angry eyes are turned our way once more
James L. Larocca

Published August 18, 2003 LARO18

Ordinarily, our boats patrolled Vietnam's rivers in pairs. But on this night we had several teams operating together as we launched the Pentagon's latest ingenious scheme for winning the war in the Mekong Delta.

The concept was simple enough: Instead of surprising people with conventional gunfire during raids, the boats would first set the houses and buildings on fire with bows and arrows. The brass called this early version of "shock and awe" Operation Flaming Arrow.

Of course, the flimsy huts burned like matchbooks, leaving the families homeless and destitute. The next day, civil action teams of soldiers would arrive bearing sheets of corrugated tin for new roofs and bags of rice to help the villagers get started again. There would also be bars of soap and clothing from church groups in the States.

I remember a particular time when, with the fires still smoldering in the stultifying heat of a Delta morning, the teams distributed boxes of heavy sweaters.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[Brian Sweat]

11. "maybe our iron-fisted approach to the conduct of ops

is beginning to alienate Iraqis."


You think? How can people be so obtuse.

[newyawker99]

33. breezygirl

Per DU copyright rules
please post only 4
paragraphs from the
news source.

Thank you.


NYer99
DU Moderator

[DinahMoeHum]

10. Methinks you're hearing and seeing the same rationalizations. . .

excuses, denials, and lies coming out the mouths of the BFEE and military brass as were said and done during the Vietnam years.

Certianly Rumsfeld and his cronies in OSP (Office of Special Plans) bring comparisons to Robert McNamara and the "Pentagon Whiz Kids".

Some historian (trying to find out who) calls this Iraq/Afghanistan debacle "Vietnam on crack cocaine"

:evilfrown:

[Brian Sweat]

12. How long before Bush declares that he has a secret plan

to end the war in Iraq?

[DinahMoeHum]

23. Five will get you ten he does this in October 2004. . .

before the elections.


:evilfrown:

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SnowGoose]

15. how about saving your racial editorializing for another site?

I often see the charge of antisemitism levelled against anyone who criticizes the government of Israel, and frequently think it's unwarranted and diversionary.

However, the tone of your post had pretty clear antisemitic overtones. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think so.

I'm not judging your internal feelings - which I cannot know - but rather your choice of words.

Bush sent our troops into Iraq, not Sharon, not Israel, OK?

[bodhisattava]

16. I did not say that Israel or Sharon sent our troops to Iraq.

I said that the Jewish intellectuals behind the PNAC document,men like Wolfowitz, Perle,Kristol have formed an unholy alliance with
the rightwing oil imperialists,Cheney and Rumsfeld. And it is this alliance that sent our troops into Iraq.

[Nevernose]

18. And yet you could have made the same point

If you'd left out the word "Jewish." In this case, adding the irrelevant (and also inaccurate) word "Jewish" is clearly express anti-semitism.

[SnowGoose]

19. Why not the "white" PNAC or "male" PNAC?

I'm not trying to start a war, I just wanted to point out that your post implies that the jewishness of these people is the problem.

Example: "Jewish Intellectuals of the PNAC". Why not blame them for being white, or male?

If you think they're bad people or have bad ideas, fine, beat them over the head with that. But why label someone as being jewish or mexican or arab or black or a woman or a homosexual?

Again, maybe that's just my liberal humanism coming through, but the several aspects of your post that deal with jewish stuff struck me - it wasn't just catagorizing the PNAC people as jewish, there was also the Leiberman thing and the Hitlerian comment. Your post struck me - as someone who has no idea who you are - as being written by someone who just doens't like "jews".

If I'm wrong, all the better. But even if I am reading too much into your post, you should at least be aware of how it comes across.

Salam alaykum!

[bodhisattava]

20. The only reason I said Jewish intellectuals is because I am aware

of the origins of the PNAC document which came from Wolfowitz and Kristol who are disciples of the University Of Chicago Political Theorist Leo Strauss.These men were the prime movers of the PNAC document which were later endorsed by the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal. What is wrong with calling them Jewish intellectuals?
It is their jewishness and concern for Israeli security in a sea of arab nations that has impelled them to develop these ideas.

[Fixated]

31. ...

If he had said the "white" PNAC, he wouldn't have gotten flak, would he? We all hold our double standards.

[TacticalPeek]

32. Is Wolfie-poo gay??? Inquiring freepers want to know. n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

21. whoah ...speak for yourself...i didn't read any anti-semetism in his post!

[Mari333]

29. I also Blame the NECONS in the US AND Israel

and its time people woke up that both the US and Israel have asshole neocons running this shit
http://www.iraqwar.org/Armageddonupdates.htm



edit to add :Sharon is also a murderous tyrant and can kiss my ass.

[Solly Mack]

17. I think "Vietnam" daily

and I'm old enough to remember. Last time it was watching my aunts go through the daily fear of impending death via telegram...now it's me.

It's a quagmire and the soldiers know it.

[TacticalPeek]

22. A Case:

In Viet Nam, we fought the Viet Namese.
In Iraq, we fight the Iraquis.

Nam, guerilla war.
Iraq, G war, too.

In Nam, many troops there were, "WTF?".
In Iraq, many troops there are, "WTF?".

In Nam, many of the indigenous "allies" were, "WTF?".
In Iraq, many of the indigenous "allies" are, "WTF?".

With Nam, our international prestige diminished, against our vital national interest.
With Iraq, our international prestige is diminished, against our vital national interest.

Nam endured bad US leadership.
Iraq endures our worst leadership.

With Nam, millions died and suffered until a change of leadership.
With Iraq, this time, we will not wait.

[DemoTex]

24. Iraq seems, in many ways, very much like Vietnam to me.

Just like Rummy seems, in many ways, very much like Robert Strange McNamara. Both are Repubs; both smart as whips; both arrogant assholes; and both destined to marginal lives as abject, disgraceful failures. McNamara was not able to manipulate and direct his presidents like Rummy has Bu$h, and Rummy is showing no signs of the mellowing that McNamara exhibited after initial setbacks (Ia Drang battles and the firey suicide, below his Pentagon office window, of war protestor Norman Morrison). So, if I had to spend time in a lifeboat with one of them, it would be McNamara.

The initial quick "victory" in Iraq, about which Bu$h strutted and crowed on the deck of the USS Abe Lincoln, is not without parallel in Vietnam either. While the Iraq victory was achieved with relatively few US casualties, that could be attributed to technology. If I were a soldier I would want technology on my side. We claimed victory in the Ia Drang battles also, and as a function US KIAs versus NVA KIAs it was a victory. However, and here is the key, at the time we had no idea how long Vietnam would last, and Iraq is, at this moment, just as open-ended as Vietnam was then.

Don't forget too, that there are many who believe that we won every major battle in Vietnam but lost the war. There are those who will blame anyone that is handy: the press, hippie peacenicks, the generals, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Kissinger, draftees, etc., etc., ad nauseum.

We lost one big battle in Vietnam and it was the one that counted. In Vietnam we lost the battle with the people, because far more of them were our enemy than our friend. As the guerilla war opens up in Iraq our massive technological edge is again emasculated.

Yeah. Vietnam in the sand. Just another high tech quagmire. Fuck air superiority. But don't say they weren't warned.

[PapaClay]

26. And when a democrat gets in

to the white house (hopefully in 04), the trogs will immediately begin badgering him about 'exit strategies', and blame him for the unnacceptable loss of American lives. If he gets us out of there, they will condemn him for 'abandoning Iraq'. Bet on it.

[Mari333]

30. Bull

agood Dem gets on his hands and knees after he is elected, and BEGS the UN to step in, and brings ALL our troops home...then launches a criminal investigation on Bush war crimes and crimes at home..

[TacticalPeek]

27. There it is. n/t

[leftofthedial]

34. there are a few differences

we didn't invade Viet Nam. we started with advisors and escalated from there.

Viet Nam has no oil or other significant resources.

In Viet Nam, we were not adding neo imperialism to an already volatile religious struggle.


All fo these differences, BTW, make this situation even WORSE than Viet Nam, IMO.