Which war are we fighting?

[KatJ]

I think that much of each person's perspective on the war in Iraq (and the greater war against terror, in a greater sense, if you want to go that far) is informed by each person's sense of history. Specifically, I think that how one feels depends on whether one draws a closer parallel between the current war and Viet Nam (it is actually two words, BTW), or the current war and WWII.

 

So, what's your take?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

"Gulf war" #1

[Andy]

WWII? On what possible level is that even remotely similar to Gulf War II?

 

Anyway...it's not like Vietnam because we have a clear exit strategy. Bush won't call it an exit strategy, but the fact is that once we have Iraqi police trained up and everything is set to go (which could happen in the next 18 months or so), we'll be pulling out. Whereas in Vietnam, there was never a clear picture of when it would be over. That's why all the Iraq-Nam comparisons are foolish.

[sweetpeteman]

I agree with ndistops. Besides also seeming to have a plan to get out, albeit not being implemented all that well, there also is a better plan going in. The army is not scared to go after these guys, unlike in Viet Nam where they wouldn't cross the DMZ into North Viet Nam, only doing bombing and Special Forces missions into it. In Nam, they sat back and fought a sit and wait war, where the missions in South Nam were there only to hunt down the VC.

 

Also, with Iraq, there are positives. Sure, the media won't report on them, they're not sexy, but they are there while the Vietnamese really didn't care who was in charge in the long run.

[wolf stansson]

This thread is ludicrous.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Neither.

 

The Iraq War is pretty small in the number of friendly casualties. The large insurgent element in this war directly contrasts the more conventional WWII from our perspective (except near the end and that was a fairly limited insurgent campaign by the Nazis). The Nazis got a nasty taste of guerilla warfare after their initial blitz (e.g. Yugoslavia).

 

The Iraq War is very different from the Vietnam War. Number of casualties, morale of troops, professionalism of the military as a whole, and the type of combat are different. It's like comparing an apple and a bird. How many differences would you like?

 

I have yet to hear anyone logically compare Iraq and Vietnam and come to the conclusion they are similar. It's more of an anti-war slogan at this point, rather than a valid comparison.

[CubinNY]

The war in Iraq has no parellel in American history. Period.

 

Viet Nam was a jungle war fought by and funded by comunists.

 

World War II was a declared war fought all over the world

 

However there are minor aspects that are common to both VN and wWII. Much like VN, Iraq is a vanity piece thought up by neo-fascists long before 9/11. The WTC was just a pretext. the war in viet nam was a thought piece based on the "domino effect" with the Gulf of Tonken as the pretext. Now Iraq is devolving into a civil war with similarities to VN but not remotely the same.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/vance_the_cubs_fan/thread_rocks.jpg

[goonys evil twin]

It's mostly like the war on drugs.

[treebird]

It's mostly like the war on drugs.

 

that is a good freaking answer.

[USSoccer]

It's mostly like the war on drugs.

 

that is a good freaking answer.

 

Seconded. You cannot fight a war against something that isn't a Nation-State.

 

Having said that, this war kind of looks like several various Occupier vs Partisan conflicts. Just comparing it to Vietnam is a cop out.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

It's mostly like the war on drugs.

 

that is a good freaking answer.

 

Seconded. You cannot fight a war against something that isn't a Nation-State.

Having said that, this war kind of looks like several various Occupier vs Partisan conflicts. Just comparing it to Vietnam is a cop out.

 

I don't know. We fought wars against communism and Nazism.

[USSoccer]

It's mostly like the war on drugs.

 

that is a good freaking answer.

 

Seconded. You cannot fight a war against something that isn't a Nation-State.

Having said that, this war kind of looks like several various Occupier vs Partisan conflicts. Just comparing it to Vietnam is a cop out.

 

I don't know. We fought wars against communism and Nazism.

 

Our war against Nazism was WWII, and by definition, you cannot "war" with an ideology. You cannot fight a war with an idea. You fight ideas with better ideas, not bombs and soldiers.

[OleMissCub]

Comparing Iraq to Vietnam and ESPECIALLY WWII is ludicrous. When we lose 13-18,000 soldiers per YEAR, most of whom are drafted, then maybe we can compare to Vietnam. When we lose 2-3,000 soldiers a DAY, then we can compare to WWII.

 

The answer is NEITHER

[OleMissCub]

Now Iraq is devolving into a civil war with similarities to VN but not remotely the same.

 

Agreed. Indeed, the only "sorta" similarity I can see between the two is that Vietnam divided in 54 after an insurgency defeated the French. However...we ain't the French....hopefully.

[sweetpeteman]

Man, maybe one of the 12 who have voted for VN will actually defend their pick...

[UK1679666180]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

[Andy]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

If Zogby can be entered as grounds in the debate, then so can the American Family Association.

[TruffleShuffle]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

If Zogby can be entered as grounds in the debate, then so can the American Family Association.

 

Why? Zogby conducted a poll, and an interesting one at that. I'm pretty sure the AFA does not have much to say or much insight to add about the situation in Iraq.

[OleMissCub]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

 

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.

 

Ummm....so?

 

Newsflash:

 

1918:An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of France and Belgium. Representing the minority, one doughboy who voted to stay was quoted as saying "Ya, i like eating rats and living in trenches full of mud. Pooping without getting shot by a sniper isn't so bad, it's actually quite fun. I don't mind it here"

 

1943: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of North Africa

1944: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of France

1945: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of the Pacific Islands.

1951: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of Korea

[UK1679666180]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

 

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.

 

Ummm....so?

 

Newsflash:

 

1918:An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of France and Belgium. Representing the minority, one doughboy who voted to stay was quoted as saying "Ya, i like eating rats and living in trenches full of mud. Pooping without getting shot by a sniper isn't so bad, it's actually quite fun. I don't mind it here"

 

1943: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of North Africa

1944: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of France

1945: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of the Pacific Islands.

1951: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of Korea

 

 

 

In both World Wars would troops wanting out be at the expense of accomplishing the goals or would they be wanting out after the goal was accomplished?

 

Like Vietnam, I think the Iraq War runs parallel to wanting out before the task has been completed rather than getting it done and out ASAP.

[OleMissCub]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

 

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.

 

Ummm....so?

 

Newsflash:

 

1918:An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of France and Belgium. Representing the minority, one doughboy who voted to stay was quoted as saying "Ya, i like eating rats and living in trenches full of mud. Pooping without getting shot by a sniper isn't so bad, it's actually quite fun. I don't mind it here"

 

1943: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of North Africa

1944: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of France

1945: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of the Pacific Islands.

1951: An overwhelming majority of American troops want out of Korea

 

 

 

In both World Wars would troops wanting out be at the expense of accomplishing the goals or would they be wanting out after the goal was accomplished?

 

Like Vietnam, I think the Iraq War runs parallel to wanting out before the task has been completed rather than getting it done and out ASAP.

 

It says 25 percent of soldiers in Iraq want out immediately. I'd imagine that in Vietnam the percentage wanting out immediately was probably more than triple and was probably nearly unanimous considering the complete lack of an attainable objective and the conscripted status of the soldiers. I would think that most of the soldiers in Iraq think we should leave within a year because they probably feel that they are not needed anymore when viewing the successful elections being held and finally the successful training of the NIA and the ICDC.

 

I'm still not quite sure why that poll was posted on this forum in the first place and i'm not sure what argument it advances as far as attempting to place Iraq in a historical context.

[UK1679666180]

Wanting out in year is regardless of accomplising the goal, Iraq will not be an independent state in one year capable of operating w/out US assistance of US soliders.

 

probably nearly unanimous considering the complete lack of an attainable objective and the conscripted status of the soldiers.

 

There's probably a large percentage of soliders in Iraq pondering the same thought as far as an attainable object.

 

I put the poll there to show there are questions concerning the war and the validity behind having all the troops there.

[OleMissCub]

Wanting out in year is regardless of accomplising the goal, Iraq will not be an independent state in one year capable of operating w/out US assistance of US soliders.

 

probably nearly unanimous considering the complete lack of an attainable objective and the conscripted status of the soldiers.

 

There's probably a large percentage of soliders in Iraq pondering the same thought as far as an attainable object.

 

I put the poll there to show there are questions concerning the war and the validity behind having all the troops there.

 

Don't we already know that this is a controversial war?

 

Again, with respect, I can't help but think that the poll proves very little, especailly with regards to our debate over a US military comparison to Iraq. I'm sure a good many of the responses are probably just wishful thinking. If you interviewed a grunt in the 28th Infantry Division sitting in a foxhole in the Hurtgen Forest in Nov. 44, i'm sure he'd answer "ya i think we should be outta here in a year". I don't think that poll is indicative of troop morale, especially considering the vast numbers of re-enlistments.

[UK1679666180]

Sure it is, but the views from the troops are more valuable than you, me, agenda whipped politicans, and the rest of the public.

 

I think the morale is lower than previous wars (except Vietnam), there are probably plenty of troops who feel the Iraqis either don't want their help, don't want them there, or will go back to a dictator state once they leave.