Do you think it is irresponsible to compare Iraq to Vietnam?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » April 7, 2004, 6:17 pm

Do you think it is irresponisible for US Congressmen and women to compare Iraq to Vietnam?

Siji · Post by **Siji** » April 7, 2004, 6:27 pm

Since I believe we're over there for money, I would agree this is as pointless as Vietnam was.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » April 7, 2004, 6:29 pm

Certainly not. I believe the two are comparable, although I'm sure the claim will be made they are trying to attach the "stigma" of Vietnam to Iraq, something the all volunteer army can do without IMHO.

*images of Kyokan throwing blood on a soldier and shouting "Babykiller!" come to mind, although it's funnier than it sounds because Kyokan is a banana with a beret*

It's done for a single reason, and that's to paint the president in a bad light in an election year, so of course. It's just politics and all subjects are fair game, war is the great grandaddy of election year topics.

So hell yes, make the comparisons.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » April 7, 2004, 6:37 pm

i certainly believe there are similarities, most notabley, our initial involvement under false pretenses.

that being said, i think that the manner in which Ted Kennedy and some others are trying to brand this as "Bush's Vietnam" is a tactic that will backfire, and is not productive.

noel · Post by **noel** » April 7, 2004, 6:40 pm

I think using it as a tactic to belittle Bush in not helpful, or warranted, but I do think the similarities are there and it's completely reasonable to make the comparison.

While we're not seeing the same daily bodycounts we were in Vietnam, we are still hemmoraging a few soldiers a day, and we are arguably not accomplishing anything of value at this point. We don't appear to have any clear goals except for a handoff.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » April 7, 2004, 7:42 pm

First off: If a person has not yet been swayed to vote against Bush, then nothing Ted Kennedy says is going to sway them.

Second: I don't see how making an analogy can be "irresponsible," per se. In my mind, a congressman has an obligation to speak their minds about such matters. If their constituency finds their views to be offensive or incorrect, then the constituency can respond by voting that congressman out of office.

I'd actually be much happier if all congressmen were as forthcoming with their views as Kennedy.

If my congressman were to express his sincere, deeply held belief that white men are the most oppressed demographic in the world today, I don't that'd be irresponsible. I think it'd be fucking stupid, and I'd do everything I could to see someone else elected. Still, I'd rather he voice his opinion than lie, follow the polls, and manipulatively push his agenda.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » April 7, 2004, 7:57 pm

I haven't read what Senator Kennedy has said specifically, but there are both similarities and un-similiarities (that doesnt' sound right..) between Vietnam and Iraq..

Similarities:
- False pretenses.
- Split support for it both at home and world wide.
- Hard to fight an enemy at their home court.
- Fighting style (guerrilja style enemy).

Un-similarities:
- The geographical area of the fighting.
- The support of the enemy (aka, weapon supplies etc).
- Number of casualties.

gah damnit had more but they went poof.

All in all, I don't think it is irresponsible to compare the two. In fact, I think it is more irresponsible of the Bush administration when they ban pictures of coffins etc. Not only does it hide part of the truth (people realize easier what is really going on when they see coffins with flags than a report in text on a website), but imho it also takes something away from the sacrifices those who die have made.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » April 7, 2004, 8:50 pm

Didnt vietnam start the same way? few casualties at first, then suddenly a huge boom and the real fighting started? This sadr guy is starting to look like charli, and dont start reaming me on that, im not sure if its a fair comparison either

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » April 7, 2004, 9:25 pm

Well, you have to remember.. these guys are all bucking to be the next Saddam. You may well institute a faux democracy by your hand over date, but it's only a matter of time before the next coup.

I think the biggest problem/similarity w/ Vietnam is that you can't tell one Iraqi from the next; the enemy is that guy shooting at you. All of which means you can only be reactive and can't really use the normal scorched earth tactics you tend to win wars with.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » April 8, 2004, 9:24 am

The BIG difference between Iraq and Vietnam is that the administration is not tying the hands of the servicemen and women that are there. It is similar in that the people there are somewhat split into groups that want us there and some that don't want us there. No matter what we do or had done, we can't make everyone there happy.

The other major difference is that the governement has not made the mistake of instituting a draft. The drafting of unwilling participants to fight in Vietnam made that war 10 times as unpopular as it already was. It also helped to make the casualty rate much higher than it would be if it was fought by nothing but trained long-term members of the military. Six months of boot camp does not make you anywhere near prepared to fight effectively. I wish I could find the stats again on the casualty rates of volunteer vs drafted servicemen in Vietnam.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » April 8, 2004, 9:57 am

Although if it lasts a long time (or if something else pops up that needs the World Police's intervention), the military is running out of troops heh.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » April 8, 2004, 12:36 pm

Kelshara wrote:I haven't read what Senator Kennedy has said specifically, but there are both similarities and un-similiarities (that doesnt' sound right..) between Vietnam and Iraq..

Similarities:
- False pretenses.
- Split support for it both at home and world wide.
- Hard to fight an enemy at their home court.
- Fighting style (guerrilja style enemy).

Un-similarities:
- The geographical area of the fighting.
- The support of the enemy (aka, weapon supplies etc).
- Number of casualties.

gah damnit had more but they went poof.

All in all, I don't think it is irresponsible to compare the two. In fact, I think it is more irresponsible of the Bush administration when they ban pictures of coffins etc. Not only does it hide part of the truth (people realize easier what is really going on when they see coffins with flags than a report in text on a website), but imho it also takes something away from the sacrifices those who die have made.

Good post agree with it all

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » April 8, 2004, 1:31 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:The BIG difference between Iraq and Vietnam is that the administration is not tying the hands of the servicemen and women that are there. It is similar in that the people there are somewhat split into groups that want us there and some that don't want us there. No matter what we do or had done, we can't make everyone there happy.

The other major difference is that the governement has not made the mistake of instituting a draft. The drafting of unwilling participants to fight in Vietnam made that war 10 times as unpopular as it already was. It also helped to make the casualty rate much higher than it would be if it was fought by nothing but trained long-term members of the military. Six months of boot camp does not make you anywhere near prepared to fight effectively. I wish I could find the stats again on the casualty rates of volunteer vs drafted servicemen in Vietnam.

25% of the total forces in Vietnam were draftees.
Draftees accounted for 30.4% (17,725) of combat deaths in Vietnam.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » April 8, 2004, 1:50 pm

Sionistic wrote:Didnt vietnam start the same way? few casualties at first, then suddenly a huge boom and the real fighting started? This sadr guy is starting to look like charli, and dont start reaming me on that, im not sure if its a fair comparison either

KIA + Non hostile deaths by year:
1961-1965: 1,864
1966: 6,053
1967: 11,058
1968: 16,511
1969: 11,527
1970: 6,065
1971: 2,348
1972: 561

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » April 8, 2004, 2:16 pm

How can it be irresponsible for a politician to make the comparison when military personel is doing the same thing? Brennan Byrne (don't ask me to translate his military rank from Norwegian heh) who supposedly leads the forces fighting in Falluja compared the fighting there now to the Tet-offensive in Vietnam.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 8, 2004, 3:23 pm

I think there is much less pot smoking by our troops in Iraq.

nobody · Post by **nobody** » April 8, 2004, 9:40 pm

Aranuil wrote:I think using it as a tactic to belittle Bush in not helpful, or warranted, but I do think the similarities are there and it's completely reasonable to make the comparison.

While we're not seeing the same daily bodycounts we were in Vietnam, we are still hemmoraging a few soldiers a day, and we are arguably not accomplishing anything of value at this point. We don't appear to have any clear goals except for a handoff.

Kelshara wrote:Although if it lasts a long time (or if something else pops up that needs the World Police's intervention), the military is running out of troops heh.

i'm surprised to actually agree with these two.