In Iraq, the scale is smaller, but there are echoes. How it compares with Vietnam

Search

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2002
Messages
75,154
Tokens
040410_quagmire_hd.hmedium.jpg


Newsweek - By Evan ThomasApril 19 issue - While U.S. soldiers battled to regain control of Iraqi cities, President George W. Bush was on his ranch last week in Crawford, Texas, giving a tour of the local flora and fauna to a group of conservationists. He was uncharacteristically late for his tour guests because he wanted to watch his national-security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, testify before the 9/11 commission. (One of the reporters covering Bush joked that the president hasn't watched anything that long that wasn't a baseball game.) The president did not have much to say about the mess in Iraq, and aides said that he had no plans to give a major speech. A White House official explained that Bush wanted to hold off and let the military-operations spokesmen do the talking, though it has not gone unnoticed by Bush's aides that the president's recent nationwide addresses have been largely panned.

Earlier in the week Bush did surprise reporters by appearing before them after meeting with the family of Army infantryman Chris Hill, killed by a bomb in the Iraq town of Fallujah. "We've got to stay the course and we will stay the course," said Bush, who appeared teary-eyed. Hill's father-in-law, Douglas Cope, had not been eager for the meeting with the president because, he told NEWSWEEK, he was concerned that the encounter would be "political." But Cope reported that Bush was emotional and that the president told the dead soldier's family, "I promise this job will be finished over there." Cope added: "That really was what I wanted to hear. We cannot leave this like Vietnam."
It's the war that never seems to go away. Perhaps we should feel comforted that Bush had time for nature tours and wasn't hunched over a map in the White House basement like Lyndon Johnson during Vietnam, picking bombing targets at 2 a.m. But, having bet his presidency on Iraq, Bush knows that if the war spins out of control, he may end up like Johnson, a political casualty of war. Bush wants to be seen as a "war president" who is decisive and acts. But now comes the real test: can he persuade the American people to make the sort of sacrifices and long-term commitments that go with being the world's sole superpower in what increasingly looks like a clash of civilizations?

Hard questions—and public opinion—reflect the complexities and ambiguities facing the president and his team. According to the latest NEWSWEEK Poll, a majority (57 percent) of Americans still believe that going to war with Iraq was the right thing to do. But close to half (46 percent) say they are not confident that the United States will ever bring the country stability and democracy. And four in 10 Americans are very concerned that Iraq will become another Vietnam.

Newsweek article
 

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2002
Messages
75,154
Tokens
Out - actually the Newsweek article is rather un-biased if you read the whole thing. It just tells us what the news in and about Iraq is.

The problem with posting articles is some posters like yourself automatically do not like them because of the title or subject matter. On the other hand we get plenty of articles from Newsmax and other web-sites that I am sure you feel are OK. Bottom line is they all add to the debate, which is the important thing to begin with.


wil.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
980
Tokens
Wilm,
You're a mod now act like it...

Find a few article from the other side..

Schools rebuilt, free food handed out, 25 million Iraqis freed. The articles are out there.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2002
Messages
75,154
Tokens
Out - I will tell you what, if you insist on holding my "mod" status against me politically, (in a gambling forum), I will stay out of the politics forum. I will add that it is very unfair to throw "your a mod now act like it and post some articles from the other side". I have to remain neutral in every other fourm except this one.

wil.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
The thing to keep in perspective is that with all the deaths of US Soldiers in Iraq, there were more deaths in a week in Viet. in 1968 during that Kennedy/Johnson war...than in Iraq in over ayear.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
First, if someone wants some 'pro-war' articles, post them yourself. Wilheim and other moderators have no obligation to promote your message of death and destruction.

Second, the perspective that PATRIOT is seeking would be better viewed thru the lens of 1961-2 Vietnam versus 2004 Iraq. The casualty rates for U.S. sponsored troops is right on track. If Bush is finally elected President this fall, it's not unreasonable to forecast that the death toll in 2008, for example, will also be right on par with 1966 Vietnam.

How many is too many? A thousand? Ten thousand? Fifty thousand?

How many of your neighbors and family members will you feed into the meat grinder until you realize that if the Iraqis truly want to determine their own destiny, they will need to do it without the help of U.S. killing forces.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
One is a tradgedy,a million is a statistic. -Joseph Stalin

First off my family has already donated.

You are the same type of person that would have howling at the top of your lungs.If Bush a month in office went in and killed Bin Laden and in the meantime saved us from 9/11 and called him Hitler for killing a freedom fighter.
Maybe Saddam would have been too old to attack the US but his darling sons may have...they won't now.
There are a million other reasons this is not Vietnam,including there are no superpowers on the Iraqy side.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
1,730
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by barman:

Second, the perspective that PATRIOT is seeking would be better viewed thru the lens of 1961-2 Vietnam versus 2004 Iraq. The casualty rates for U.S. sponsored troops is right on track. If Bush is finally elected President this fall, it's not unreasonable to forecast that the death toll in 2008, for example, will also be right on par with 1966 Vietnam.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The US captured Bagdahd within weeks of the war. Did the US capture Hanoi in 1962? We have Hussein in custody; when did the United States take Ho Chi Minh into custody during the Vietnam War? What about all the refugees fleeing Vietnam during and after the war...why is it Iraqi refugees in the past are returning in vast numbers back to their home country?

You lefties sure are ignorant about your history.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,214
Messages
13,565,510
Members
100,768
Latest member
cluon4073
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com