The Vietnam war and the Iraq war are two wars that never should have occurred. The countless lives lost and costs to the United States is reprehensible. The unfortunate part is that after the dust settles and families are trying to deal with their loss, nobody really understands why we were there in the first place. The attack on Iraq was clearly a "switch and bait" effort to make it appear that the United States was retaliating for the 911 terrorist attack. Unfortunately, Iraq had nothing to do with that attack, and like Vietnam, we have been over there way too long fighting a war that never should have started.
The United States is always sticking their noses where they do not belong. What is going on overseas is none of our business. Israel and Iraq are fighting over stuff that is between them. Israel is trying to steal land from Iraq, and the U.S government wants to bust in between people and be in control. Because of this, we are losing many people. Many soldiers are dying for unjust cause. Many of these soldiers joined the armed forces years ago and didn't think there would ever be a war. They don't want to be in Iraq. They are going through much mental anguish and many are killing themselves. They are not used to desert climate, just as in Vietnam the soldiers faced jungle territories they were not used to. The soldiers are leaving Iraq disabled mentally and physically. The effects will last many years to a lifetime. They will have horrifying stories to tell their children and friends. These are some of the similarities between the Vietnam and Iraq War.
Iraq and Vietnam are similar in quite a few ways. First of all they have both been extended conflicts. They have both exceeded 7 years, and Iraq is quickly approaching 8 years. Secondly, neither has a concise measure of what victory is. Thirdly, they are both being fought half-ass by the United States. I think it has been proven that you can't win a war prosecuting it Willy Neely.
Similarities can be drawn between the Vietnam War and Iraq on several fronts ranging from how they were both fought to the reasons for US intervention. While both military actions were entered in the hope of improving the lives of the people, it is questionable if the results are equal to making lives better or simply serving our own national goals.
Both cases had an outgunned force, forced to the elements of gorilla warfare. When this occurred, they had to use all their means to fight the enemy even at below expectation capacity. Both may end up in a simple withdrawal in this case, so perhaps it will be almost the same, just less wet, and a bit hotter.
I'd like to think that in a generation that Iraq will be like Vietnam is now, preferably sooner. Commerce came and erased some of the ills of being at war for so long. Complete healing may be impossible, but the sooner the healing begins the better. We need to be out of there as soon as we can because winning simply is not an option, and we should have known better.
The Americans troops are facing an enemy that doesn't show themselves and hides and plants bombs and just like the Vietnam war the U.S. was there too long. Just like how the U.S. trained the South Vietnam troops to fend from the North, They trained the Iraqi police and Army to defend the towns from the insurgents, but they don't have the skill or bravery to fight them they retreat and their towns fall into the enemies hands all over, towns the American troops fought so hard for and lost some great men doing so taken back in a matter of a few days. Not to mention that both wars costed America lots of money to keep them there and the fact that both wars lasted a long time. Also that both wars were not an winnable wars, they U.S. wasn't ready for roadside bombs and the fact that those insurgents don't care if they die because they think that by killing Americans they are awarded by some fake god. So really was this war worth losing great men?
Stupid evil old men start these wars to prove a point and to gain strategic control of territory and resources. They don’t care how many lives are wasted on either side. They will keep dumping money and pouring blood on the problem trying to smother it. Idiotic tactic. I was with the 1st Armored Division (Ansbach Germany) during Desert Storm. They should have let us finish the job right then and there. I was with the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault, Fort Campbell, KY) during OIF 2006-2007, during the “troop surge”. No real plan, just keep sending in troops, just like Vietnam. Moronic strategy.
They can both be said to have been wars fought over nothing. We went into each war because our presidents wanted to seem powerful. In Bush's case, he wanted to retaliate because of the 9/11 attacks. However, both wars were unnecessary and eventually led to countless American casualties and deaths.
Both the Vietnam and Iraq war started for ridiculous reasons. Once America began to lose support for the war, the pressure to withdraw troops began to occur. In both the Vietnam and Iraq war they did not/have not withdrawn troops successfully, according to the public. Both wars dealt with Presidents (Nixon, Bush) who had no idea how to approach this situation.
Vietnam was fought to stop the spread of communism and to try to keep South Vietnam free. The Iraq war is being fought for the freedom of the USA and to stop terrorism. Any similarities end with the word war, with the start of the Iraq war taking place in the U.S. at the World Trade Center. The Iraq war is more about being able to choose how one thinks of God and the Western way of life, which in short means freedom.
Vietnam was the key spoke in the wheel of containment. Many in the government believed that if Vietnam fell, so would Cambodia, Thailand, India. The Truman doctrine of containment along with the domino theory justified American intervention in Vietnam. Doctrine will justify action thus the Gulf of Tonkin was justified under the threat posed by the expansion of Communism. The threat never fully materialized, and Vietnam proved to be benign, communism stayed within the borders. It is difficult to determine the effect American involvement in southeast Asia had on deterring both Soviet and Chinese expansion, regardless, the war demonstrated the will of the United States to take on a lengthy conflict sent a clear message to friend and foe. America will fight when it's interests and ideology are threatened. The Bush doctrine of preemption had to drum up popular support by creating the eminent threat of weapons of mass destruction, in other words justification for a new ideology that appears contrary to the beliefs of America. We never throw the first punch, always respond with righteous indignation and a whole lot of counter-punching and come out the clear moral victor. We must believe that our actions are guided by certain moral principles, these principles guide and justify the nasty business of war.
According to what I've read between these two articles, I see that there are more differences. During the Vietnam war, they didn't really have a clear mission on what they were fighting for & then they also had a lack of confidence back then about winning. However, in the Iraq war it was totally different, they know what they're fighting for, and also has grown more confidence than before.
In Vietnam, there was a clear civil war between competing political philosophies, prior to foreign involvement. In Iraq, this was not the case, when foreign powers entered the country to depose the government and institute a new regime from whole cloth. This is not an argument for not engaging in the war, but merely an argument for the different states of internal government in the nations at question, prior to the outbreak of war.
The Vietnam War was not our war to fight. There was no reason for us to be there in the first place. We lost hundreds of thousands of young men for no reason at all. The Iraqi War has been a war to maintain our values here in America, and one to help the Iraqi people be rid of terrorism in their own country. We have been very successful with little casualties. While any life is too precious to be out there in war, at least the young men in this war did not die in vain.
The war in Vietnam, free of conspiracy theories, was fought to halt the spread of Communism in south east Asia. The war in Iraq was and still is being fought to halt the spread of terrorism. If you buy into that theory, then it was fought to oust a man who murdered millions of innocent people.