Condi: Historic parallels Iraq and Vietnam aren't 'very helpful,' and aren't accurate

[Human Torch]

Wednesday, November 15, 2006 · Last updated 1:16 a.m. PT

Bush Vietnam trip revives Iraq 'quagmire'

By JENNIFER LOVEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER



http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fseattlepi.nwsource.com%2Fnational%2F1151AP_Bush.html

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's recent acknowledgment that the war in Iraq was comparable to the Viet Cong's psychologically devastating Tet Offensive in 1968 was hardly the first time a parallel has been drawn between the Iraq and Vietnam conflicts. Questions about a "quagmire" have haunted the president's Iraq policy since before a single bomb fell on Baghdad.

But this week, amid an intensifying discussion at home about the future of the war, Bush gives the comparison debate another kick by walking among Vietnam War relics on a four-day visit to the communist nation created after American troops departed 33 years ago.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, speaking en route to Hanoi meeting, also rejected comparisons between the two wars. "Historic parallels of that kind are, I think, not very helpful and I don't think they happen to be right," Rice told reporters. "This is a different set of circumstances with different stakes for the United States in a different kind of war."

Asked about it last week during a news conference, Bush said, "I see differences, I really do. ... I don't think it's a parallel."

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Condi Rice hasn't been 'very helpful' since moving into this administration either.

First, as National security advisor, we suffered the worst attack in our history and all she could say was 'no one could have predicted them flying airplanes into buildings'. Then, I remember Bush naming her to some made-up position to control Iraq and look where that got us. And, she will probably go down in history as one of the worst Sec. of State ever.

[aquart]

2. Why does this woman have a job?

[BrotherBuzz]

5. I wonder if James Baker and his gang are thinking the same thing.

[ieoeja]

3. I agree with her.

The establishment of a non-communist government in South Vietnam that successfully defended itself against North Vietnam would have been a victory for the United States.

The day we leave Iraq will be held up as yet another example that if the terrorists fight long enough, we will give up and leave. That is true whether we leave fifty days from now or fifty years from now. That is true even if we leave behind a pro-United States government that eradicates all support of terrorism within their country. All that ultimately matters is that we leave.

There is only one way we will win in Iraq: never leave. We must either accept "defeat" in the eyes of the terrorists, or we must annex make Iraq our 51st state.

[dogman]

4. And the August 6 PDB was only a historic document.

No real info there.

[SouthernBelle82]

6. So instead what about

reading up on what Winston Churchill thought about invading Iraq? He discovered it wouldn't work eighty something years ago. They love to compare him to Churchill so is he going to actually follow Churchill's advice??

[grytpype]

7. Iraq is going to make Vietnam look like a victory.

There really were no direct strategic repercussions from losing Vietnam, there sure as shit will be repercussions from Iraq.

[John Gauger]

8. "before a single bomb fell on Baghdad"

When was this? There was an uninterrupted bombing campaign from 1991-2003 between the two wars. Bombs were falling on Baghdad steadily for at least a year before the actual invasion.