Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iraq Is Not Vietnam
Policy Review ^ | December 2005-January 2006, No. 134. | Frederick W. Kagan

Posted on 12/04/2005 7:31:41 PM PST by Hunden

When American ground forces paused briefly during the march to Baghdad in 2003, critics of the war were quick to warn of a “quagmire,” an oblique reference to the Vietnam War. Virtually as soon as it became clear that the conflict in Iraq had become an insurgency, analogies to Vietnam began to proliferate. This development is not surprising. Critics have equated every significant American military undertaking since 1975 to Vietnam, and the fear of being trapped in a Vietnam-like war has led to the frequent demand that U.S. leaders develop not plans to win wars, but “exit strategies,” plans to get out of messes.

There is no question that the Vietnam War scarred the American psyche deeply, nor that it continues to influence American foreign policy and military strategy profoundly. CENTCOM’s strategy for the counterinsurgency effort in Iraq is an attempt to avoid making Vietnam-like mistakes. Proponents of other strategies, like “combined action platoons” or “oil spot” approaches, most frequently derive those programs from what they believe are the “right” lessons of Vietnam. It is becoming increasingly an article of faith that the insurgency in Vietnam is similar enough to the insurgency in Iraq that we can draw useful lessons from the one to apply to the other.

This is not the case…

(Excerpt) Read more at policyreview.org ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: guerilla; insurgency; iraq; oif; vietcong; vietnam; vietnamwar
This article goes into some detail of military analysis to show how much more difficult it was to fight in Vietnam than in Iraq.
1 posted on 12/04/2005 7:31:42 PM PST by Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hunden

and at the risk of sounding like I'm judging a book by the cover, I'll go out on a limb and say the author misses the point.

Iraq is similar to Vietnam - the leftists wish to recreate their great victory fm Vietnam against their enemy, the United States of America.

That is the only metaphor/comparison that matters, the only thing we need to know. Now ordinarily I'm all in favor of letting the Roe Effect continue to cull the numbers from people whom I do not consider countrymen of mine, but this is too important. We cannot let these vermin 5th columnists define the argument and paint it as they wish. Every time they mention the canard, we must call them on it - and in harsh manner.

Call them what they are, which is fools, defeatists and - yes - unpatriotic.


2 posted on 12/04/2005 8:05:25 PM PST by CGVet58 (God has granted us Liberty, and we owe Him Courage in return)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden


...someone forgot to tell Citizen Cindy...


3 posted on 12/04/2005 8:07:06 PM PST by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

The Warner Amendment signals attempted Vietnamization of Global War on Terror. After Tet in 1968 a Rand study reported an NVA disaster with staggering and surprising losses, which Colonel Bui Tin of the NVA General Staff corroborated in a 1995 Wall Street Journal interview. However, the outcry from media, intellectuals and Hollywood punctuated by Cronkite’s “quagmire” sound bite and Fonda’s pledge of solidarity with the NVA encouraged North Vietnam to regard America as irresolute. The war was won a second time in 1972 when General Giap lost an entire army in his abortive invasion. A Democratic Congress intervened for final Tonkinese conquest in 1975 by then refusing to re-supply the South Vietnamese.



The Warner Amendment presages consideration of like elegant foreign policies re-defining national interests and creating exit strategies to ensure we can cut and run as Iraqi’s pursue a broadly representative government. The amendment portends detached responses similar to those offered for recent crises in Bosnia, Mozambique, Somalia, southern Iraq, Sudan, and Rwanda, which resulted in over 2 million deaths. The amendment confirms existence of a significant constituency, which would not sustain Iraqi’s who achieved interim government, elected government, and a constitutional referendum on schedule. The amendment encourages Zarqawi and bin Laden to see an irresolute America and to persevere to implement the policy in the Zawahiri/Zaqawa letter identifying Iraq as the primary battlefield for terrorist victory and for spreading the Wahhabi/Salafi heresy.



4 posted on 12/04/2005 8:18:11 PM PST by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike; CGVet58
You are both right that a crucial similarity rests in the existence of a treasonous left as the only chance for the enemy to win (I thought Ann Coulter was exaggerating when I read her, now I know better — she does not).

What I found interesting in this article is that it provides many arguments to show how much better the situation in Iraq has always been, in military terms, than in Vietnam, and hence how much more filthy liars the MSM and the Dhimmicrats are.

5 posted on 12/04/2005 8:32:20 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

There's just enough death and violence in Iraq for the MSM to create the impression that the war in Iraq is a disaster. But if it really was a disaster, there would be 20 times more death and violence, and the MSM would be exploiting it to the point where very few Americans would still be supporting the war, and the calls for Bush's head on a platter would be that much louder.

I look at the anti-Iraq war crowd as the equivalent to fans of a mediocre NBA basketball team. If their team can do well enough to make the playoffs, it gives the fans something to get excited about and something for the local sportswriters to write about. Who cares if the team gets swept out of the first round of the playoffs. At least they gave the fans something to cheer about. At least they can hope that their team will be even better next year and that much closer to being a championship caliber team, even though it's more likely that they'll just be a slightly above average team for the forseeable future.

Highlighting all the bad news coming out of Iraq gives the left something to cheer about, and that's important for them. But they know darn well that all their cheering won't lead to anything, because deep down in their hearts they know that if Iraq was really the disaster that they're making it out to be, things would be much, much worse.


6 posted on 12/04/2005 10:03:41 PM PST by The Fop (They attacked 2 of America's main arteries, so we invaded the heart of Arabia. It's that simple)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CGVet58

You should check out the book Unheralded Victory; The Defeat of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army by Mark Woodruff. Mr. Woodruff lays out a detailed case for the utter military defeat of the Communist enemy in Vietnam, a victory that was transmogrified into defeat by the evil alchemy of the anti-war left. The reason that I think it is so relevant to contemporary affairs is because it offers a concrete historical example of how military success can be altered by unscrupulous anti-war activists into political failure. He outlines as to how the Dich Van propaganda program of the Commies in Vietnam was as smashing a success for them as their battlefield efforts were a debacle. We have our own contemporary version of a Dich Van program that is being orchestrated this time by our own 5th column here in the states.

I hope that you can read the entire book, as it is startling in it's insights as to how thoroughly the North Vietnamese were beaten. But if you can only read chapters 19-22 you will gain an invaluable insight into the betrayal of the South Vietnamese and this country's honorable effort to save SE Asia from Communist tyranny by the radical anti war left and a Democratic Congress.


7 posted on 12/05/2005 8:26:46 PM PST by DMZFrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DMZFrank

Libertat Vinta!

sounds like a worthy addition to my library. I had 3 cousins who fought in 'Nam. Two of them came back and are avowed big city in NorthEast, Group-Politics democrats. Makes me sick.

Our family is 1st generation born here of Puerto Rican ancestry - they were democrats back when that meant something. They still can't handle when I confront them with the way our democrat congress backstabbed Vietnam back in the '70's.

as for that question you ask on your profile page, the answer is... one soul at a time. I experience similarthings when talking with Puerto Rican community here (am in CT, work in NY) - that plantation bug / republicans are racist belief is like a virus and dug in deep. I'm reminded of Jesus and the parable of the 10 lepers - only one came back. So I guess patience is the key.

But we might yet see a tipping point... Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams... Lynn Swann running for Governor... and of course, Condi. I have great hopes yet for astonishing changes... Perhaps I'll live to see the day when - instead of this fixation with WEB Dubois - we will recognize his contemporary (and superior, imho) Booker Washington for his true greatness and contributions to America.

God Bless, merry Christmas...


8 posted on 12/06/2005 9:32:55 AM PST by CGVet58 (God has granted us Liberty, and we owe Him Courage in return)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson