Don't Be Fooled: It's NOT Like Vietnam!

[placton]

This stuff about Iraq being like VietNam - it's bunk. Here are the difs:

1. Vietnam, during Cold War, was based on the "containment" theory begun by Truman. This strategy eventually won the overall "war" against the Commies - without igniting WW III. Yes, Vietnam was a huge mistake, so don't get me wrong. There is no such theory underpinning Iraq (unless "give more to the rich and big corporations" is a national goal).

2. Vietnamese had no ability or desire to attack the US outside of SE Asia. No Viet Cong were flying planes into towers, or attacking US interests - no matter how much war we made against them. Iraq, on the other hand, will cause lots and lots of such attacks.

3. Vietnam did not lead to loss of US authority and friendship with other nations. Iraq, different story.

4. Vietnam was being fought at a time when social goals for all Americans were being ADVANCED, not destroyed. LBJ was pushing forward the "Great Society," ending poverty for most elderly, starting Head Start, and on and on. Even tricky Dick Nixon passed a negative income tax, and was quite progressive (other than the fact that he was a paranoid criminal scumbag).

5. The US govt's Vietnam's lies evolved almost exclusively AFTER the war started - not so much for its initiation.

6. There actually WAS a country (South Vietnam) who ASKED for our help. Yes, the country was dictatorship, but at least it was an ally.

7. We ran no risk in Vietnam of screwing the pooch globally.

8. We could AFFORD VietNam. Did you know that the last balanced budget before Bill Clinton's was LBJ's last budget (for the '69 fiscal year)?

The point: Iraq (except for body count of our troops) is ALREADY worse than Vietnam, and is quite different. And, soon, I expect, the body count will grow: at home and abroad.

[wryter2000]

1. Don't know how you arrive at #2

I agree with the rest, except maybe the "affordability" part. That's what got us our inflation problems.

[FlashHarry]

2. Yeah. #2 is a stretch.

Considering Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and hasn't been linked with any terrorists--other than Saddam's sponsoring of suicide bombers in Israel. (the Al Qaeda/Ansar-al-Islam connection doesn't hold up either, because that occurred in Kurdish/CIA-controlled Northern Iraq.)

[spinbaby]

3. I took #2 to mean...

...that the situation in Iraq will encourage Al Quaida types to attack the U.S.

Badly expressed though.

[placton]

4. Yes, badly expressed - thanks for the interpretation! (n/t)

[dfong63]

5. no, no, no!

5. The US govt's Vietnam's lies evolved almost exclusively AFTER the war started - not so much for its initiation.

you mean you haven't read that the official story of the Tonkin Gulf incident was a complete lie? many sources are available, here's just one. rather than being a difference, this is a very good parallel between the Vietnam and Iraq wars. the US provocations prior to the official commencement of the Vietnam war, are strongly prescient of the prelude to the Iraq war (II).

tonkin gulf lie launched vietnam war

``...
The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an "unprovoked attack" against a U.S. destroyer on "routine patrol" in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 -- and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a "deliberate attack" on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.

The truth was very different.

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers -- in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.

"The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam...had taken place," writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were "part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964."

On the night of Aug. 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf -- a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam.

But Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to "retaliate" for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened. ...
...''

[dfong63]

6. more objections

6. There actually WAS a country (South Vietnam) who ASKED for our help. Yes, the country was dictatorship, but at least it was an ally.

South Vietnam was not a real country, but an artificial boundary drawn by colonialist powers... it was no more of a "country" than the Confederacy was, in the US civil war. now imagine that the "confederacy" had been created by the French or British instead of being a home-grown rebellion.

[Paschall]

7. Thanks for the list, but I think your nit-picking

1. There is a theory underpinnning Iraq. It's called the United States Strategic Defense Review (I think): it's the pre-emptive strike option--the "Bush Doctrine"--elaborated by the men in black at PNAC.

2. Though they were not then called "terrorist" attacks, spectacular violence was unleashed by the Vietnam War well beyond Indochina. American interests were targetted by "anti-imperialists" in Europe. And even on US soil ROTC training centers and defense research facilities were bombed (by Americans). (Also, see Number 7 below.)

3. Vietnam led to a big dip in American prestige and influence. Weren't you watching the news from Europe in May 68?

4. Like most of your other points, simply a difference in historical context. Not directly related to Vietnam or Iraq.

5. So? In fact, our war with Iraq has been ongoing for at least a decade (remember the no-fly zones and bombings?). Before, after... what does it matter when the liar lies, given the bloodshed?

6. Yeah, well, the dictator who asked for our help was our boy wasn't he? What's the difference? That our boy in Iraq asked us to stay home?

7. I guess you don't remember the fear of nuclear war with China (the People's Republic tested its first bomb in 1964).

8. The "affordability" of an unjust war is hardly worth discussing.

I'm not sure the current situation is worse than Vietnam, but it certainly seems that it has a potential for becoming so. But that has little to do with the situation on the ground in Iraq. The biggest threat is clearly the morally bankrupt GOP leadership, with Shrub and his Cabinet first in line.

[kclown]

8. Two more things

1. Most of the fighting in Vietnam was done by draftees.

2. From The Pentagon Papers, which I highly recommend if you
have trouble falling asleep, there are requests from
Ho-Chi-Minh to Truman for American help in his fight against
the French.  After the French defeat, Eisenhower steered clear
of SE Asia for eight years, despite much advice to the
contrary.  Kennedy was actually the mover behind American
involvement in Vietnam.

[Cat Atomic]

9. Even #1 is debatable.

"1. Vietnam, during Cold War, was based on the "containment" theory begun by Truman. This strategy eventually won the overall "war" against the Commies - without igniting WW III. Yes, Vietnam was a huge mistake, so don't get me wrong. There is no such theory underpinning Iraq (unless "give more to the rich and big corporations" is a national goal)"

What was "containing communism"? Seems to me that it was just another phrase for securing markets and resources for certain western interests.

That's precisely what the invasion of Iraq was meant to accomplish. I don't see any real difference there, besides jargon.

[Bombtrack]

10. It's not worse than Vietnam, not by a long-shot

I really don't know how you can say, "Except for the body count"

that's a big friggin except

I really don't no what the point of these types of posts are, just to positively reinforce the anti-war "must be right" sentiment.

We're there now, we have to succeed, and it will be aloot easier to succeed with a democrat in office

[Mari333]

11. We dont have to succeed

we have to beg the UN to take over the entire process, admit what the US did was a mistake, apologize to the entire world, and let Iraq take care of itself. Bring the Troops Home Now, let the chips fall where they may, and Impeach the Chimp and everyone in the Cabal should be hauled off for lies and treason.

[Bombtrack]

17. you really need to get real

sorry

[Jacobin]

12. This list was put together by someone who

was not old enough to remember what happened in Vietnam and/or has been reading RW extremist literature re-writing the history of that "police action".

This list is bogus and 90% wrong with a few elements of accuracy sprinkled in to make it appear somewhat reasonable to those who either don't remember or are reading historical accounts made up by republicans.

It is bunk.

[Maple]

13. It's exactly like Viet Nam

It's a quagmire where Americans are bogged down, and being picked off.

And it has exactly the same 'exit route'.

That's all the comparison was ever meant to imply.

[Isome]

15. bogged down, and being picked off...

That's all the comparison was ever meant to imply.

---

Excuse me, you don't know me but could you post that another 20,000 times so people stop trying to make a line by line comparison of the two invasions/wars. Then, could you email that to all the empty talking heads on cable news shows so they'll stop, too.

Thanks in advance!

[protect freedom impeach bush now]

14. VIETNAM 2 - Check List

VIETNAM 2 - Preflight Check List

http://mwowatchwatchwatchwatch.blogspot.com/2003_03_02_mwowatchwatchwatchwatch_archive.html#90099975


VIETNAM 2 PREFLIGHT CHECK -

1. Cabal of oldsters who won't listen to outside advice? Check.


2. No understanding of ethnicities of the many locals? Check.


3. Imposing country boundaries drawn in Europe, not by the locals? Check.


4. Unshakeable faith in our superior technology? Check.


5. France secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.


6. Russia secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.


7. China secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.


8. SecDef pushing a conflict the JCS never wanted? Check.


9. Fear we'll look bad if we back down now? Check.


10. Corrupt Texan in the WH? Check.


11. Land war in Asia? Check.


12. Right unhappy with outcome of previous war? Check.


13. Enemy easily moves in/out of neighboring countries? Check.


14. Soldiers about to be dosed with *our own* chemicals? Check.


15. Friendly fire problem ignored instead of solved? Check.


16. Anti-Americanism up sharply in Europe? Check.


17. B-52 bombers? Check.


18. Helicopters that clog up on the local dust? Check.


19. In-fighting among the branches of the military? Check.


20. Locals that cheer us by day, hate us by night? Check.


21. Local experts ignored? Check.


22. Local politicians ignored? Check.


23. Locals used to conflicts lasting longer than the USA has been a country? Check.


24. Against advice, Prez won't raise taxes to pay for war? Check.


25. Blue water navy ships operating in brown water? Check.


26. Use of nukes hinted at if things don't go our way? Check.


27. Unpopular war? Check.


VIETNAM 2 YOU ARE CLEARED TO TAXI


posted by Barney Gumble

[Uzybone]

18. dont forget 28

Returning veterans totally fucked over by the administration? Check

[dbt]

16. It is exactly like Viet Nam

In the sense that it's a "war" we had no business* getting involved in from the very start.

:freak:
dbt

*Except to enrich some bu$h campaign donors

[veganwitch]

19. see my sig.

i almost choked on my breakfast when i heard it.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

20. It's much worse because the implications down the road are far graver

I liked the "flight check list" on Vietnam posted above, but the damage to our reputation, deterioration of allied relationships, and potential aggravation of anti-American interests around the globe leading to future terrorism is exponentially worse. Bush has made every concievably possible wrong move in response to 9/11.

The post 9/11 global saga will take years and years to play out to any recognizable conclusion.