Do you really belive that Iraq is second Vietnam for USA?

Chief Bones said:
As I remember, this was an often heard lament from the troops and military leaders during the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...
Exactly and it's probably been uttered by or at least crossed the mind of every soldier, sailor, or airman ever to be sent into combat. I've never known any combatant that has not wanted to get the job done as quickly as possible and get out of Dodge. I'm sure the Neanderthals were wishing they had more rocks and better spears when the Cro Mangons came calling.
 
DTop said:
Exactly and it's probably been uttered by or at least crossed the mind of every soldier, sailor, or airman ever to be sent into combat. I've never known any combatant that has not wanted to get the job done as quickly as possible and get out of Dodge. I'm sure the Neanderthals were wishing they had more rocks and better spears when the Cro Mangons came calling.
Click to expand...
Hey DTop
thc_laugh.gif
Which one was us and which one is Iraq?
thc_laugh.gif
 
I don't think Iraq war is new Vietnam war.
Iraq situation is differ from Vietnam.
But many years will be needed for postwar reconstruction in Iraq.
Well I know someone want Iraq to be new vietnam.
 
The situation in Iraq has not yet degenerated to a Vietnam-like state.

But, we're definitely on the way if some major changes aren't made ASAP.
 
It wouldn't be the situation IN Iraq that would make it take on a "Vietnam" status, it would be the situation IN the US.
 
I'm trying to get my butt over to Iraq... I'll save the details. But it looks like I can't be there until at least late 2008. Do you think it's too late by then?
I heard on the news that the US is planning a full complete pullout by 2008 but I don't know how credible that claim is.
 
2008 IS an election year so its quite possible but there is always Afghanistan and Africa and the Phillipines.
 
I'm from the Vietnam era, and I participated in that war willingly, but from my point of view, the similarities are quite scary.

Many of us heaved a sigh of relief when the coalition forces invaded Iraq, "maybe we can get rid of the Antichrist Hussain". From there on in, it just went downhill.

We would have been better off to do a "Mossad" on him. Hit him whilst he was in a vehicle with a Hellfire missile launched from a drone. Yeah,... I know, that is political assasination, the world's dogooders would have gone ballistic for two days, then it would have been all forgotten.

It would have saved tens of thousands of lives on both sides, not to mention the monetary cost.

It is not a "Winable" war. Everyone will lose, some more than others.
 
Ahhh yes, Damien435, believe me, I could live with that, Big time!!

It seems that the locals are doomed to die anyway, the civil war is alive and well in Iraq. We certainly haven't stopped it, or for that matter even slowed it down the slightest bit in fact it is totally beyond our control. We are trying to control middle eastern culture and beliefs with Western logic. It doesn't work, would be conquerors have tried for thousands of years,..... They all failed. Look up the fable of "The Frog and the Scorpion"

In years to come when you stand in the early morning rain in front of your local War memorial on Veteran's Day, think of your mates who died and their families who never got over the loss of their sons and daughters, you will ask yourself, "Was it worth the cost"?

The Vietnam experience certainly wasn't. The communists took over the South anyway. Our young men died to appease the military desires of persons who never even got out of their comfort zone, and in many cases profited from the war, either politically or monetarily.

When the time arrives that our collective Governments finally realise that there is no honourable way out as they did in Vietnam we will all be forced to go to the table and eat another giant sized serving of Humble Pie, and believe me, "I don't like it".

The politicians will bluster and make excuses but the truth will remain, we lost. Not because of the lack of courage or will to fight, of the men on the firing line, but those who led us too hastily into something that they didn't give proper consideration at the very start.

In wars such as this we don't only lose the war, we lose our honour in the eyes of the world. Once again, "I don't like it"

It is not a "Winable" war. Everyone will lose, some more than others.
Click to expand...
That's my view anyway.
 
Last edited:
Assasination... I don't understand why it's illegal to shoot the problem and instead make thousands of people who's only crime was being born in a country with a crappy airforce die for him.
 
Yeah, back before Iraqi Freedom was started I was thinking "How can you fight a concept with an invasion?" I think it would have been better to use assassinations on terrorists as they know no national borders. Also, no matter how ****ed in the head you are with all that fundamentalist "ALLAHU AKBAR!" crap, knowing that you might be silently gunned down in the street one day, have your throat slit out of nowhere, or simply get a sample of a very nasty disease planted on your doorknob will mess with morale. And of course, for the bigger fish, Hellfire missiles made just for you coming with no warning.

Make something like Team Rainbow, and give them the freedom to operate without borders and make judgements with their trigger fingers and see how many terrorists are shitting their pants in a couple months. Ethical? Nah, but I really see no other way to exterminate terrorists.
 
senojekips said:
I'm from the Vietnam era, and I participated in that war willingly, but from my point of view, the similarities are quite scary.

Many of us heaved a sigh of relief when the coalition forces invaded Iraq, "maybe we can get rid of the Antichrist Hussein". From there on in, it just went downhill.

We would have been better off to do a "Mossad" on him. Hit him whilst he was in a vehicle with a Hellfire missile launched from a drone. Yeah,... I know, that is political assassination, the world's do-gooders would have gone ballistic for two days, then it would have been all forgotten.

It would have saved tens of thousands of lives on both sides, not to mention the monetary cost.

It is not a "winnable" war. Everyone will lose, some more than others.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself.
One had mud, the other sand. Other than that, I see few differences.
The notable exception is the nonexistence of protest by people in the US. No one seems to care. They just complain and pump High-Octane Gas into their Huge SUVs while paying through the nose. The lack of media support is also disappointing. Before, the media wanted out. Now, Fox News still thinks we're winning. :x

I hope the draft Isn't reinstated. That would start the mayhem.

EDIT: "It's not a civil war. It's a civil woo!
-Stephen Colbert
 
Last edited:
It's like Vietnam in that if we went for four months without firing a single shot, without having a single shot fired upon us and without the Iraqi's firing a single shot on each other the media would still say it was a civil war.

"If it bleeds it leads."
- Myself on how the media chooses what goes in the news.
 
May I point out that this invasion wasn't just for the outsing of Saddam but for oil aswell...................and before you all start pelting me with virtual rocks, hear me out.


Yes it for oil, but not for us. It was to keep China and other nations out of the region. Iraq, second richest nation in the world, 14% of the worlds oil pumped out of there. What happened if some power hungry nation got there paws in on the reconstruction and dominated the region and started pumping all that black gold back home, China for example has a giant influance there. Anyone hear about the Kittyhawk being trailed by a Chinese Song sub? Anyone think it has any coincidence with the Chinese involvment in Iraq??

China basically has a choke hold on the world electronically and is looking for another power outlet to plug into. They want total global ruling on the world market and they see Iraq as a way to rule petrol pumping in the East. Who controls the world? The guy who's got the oil feilds. That region is so dependant on oil, that China could say "$6.00" a gallon, and thats money going right to Beijing. Look at the situation over there. Each family may only have one male child, children ages 5-18 go to military schools, they're reaching out for oil stakes, they produce some of the most sofisicated electronics, they're gearing up for something...........I'm sorry if that offends anyone but what is seen is what I know. But the idea of 2 billion little guys rounding around with AK's makes me kinda upset. All we need is them teaching 5 year olds how to break down an AK47.

And in comprision to Veitam, aside from stopping Communism from spreading, they didn't want the North controling that region from having a country with none of it's resources tapped into, basically a virgin country and there are always more motives that those that are mentioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top