Can similarities be drawn between the Vietnam war and the Iraq War?

  • I believe the Vietnam War and the Iraq war will both go down in history as senseless wars.

    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.

    Posted by: A Tate
  • There are similarities between the Vietnam War and the Iraq War such as the fact that the United States has no right to be there and we are losing many people for no good reason.

    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.

    Posted by: Pl4tinumCammy
  • Sure, they are similar in many ways.

    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.

    Posted by: BriaBlacken
  • Similarities can be drawn between Vietnam and Iraq - both are action that feature guerilla warfare.

    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.

    Posted by: ThegaXen
  • Both were fields of guerilla warfare

    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.

    Posted by: Bear
  • The two wars are similar in that both are obviously quagmires, where willing simply isn't an issue.

    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.

    Posted by: groovybox
  • Iraq and Vietnam: Deja vu

    500,000 + American soldiers were fielded at the peak of the Vietnam war and while winning “hearts and minds” was a common goal; search and destroy along with strategic hamlets did little to persuade the populace the American cause was best. By not understanding the culture enemies were created and by not understanding the enemy victory was futile. Similarity 30+ years later another war of insurgency was created and while similarly with Vietnam the urban areas were easy to take over. Also, Saddams government was toppled in days but by not understanding the nature of the people and the history of the region another chance of success was not likely especially factoring in the very fragile Sunni/Shiite relationship. This is neglecting the mismanagement and restrictions placed upon the military by the civilian leadership. All in all the wars proved to be fruitless and cost the lives of many brave soldiers. As well both were started under false pretenses i.e. gulf of Tonkin and weapons of mass destruction.

  • Fuck you shit

    Shit fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck you guys fucking sucks. Why do you guys have life shit? I can't understand shit..... I want a die, because my life sucks than your life so sorry, Fuck myself FUck fuck fuck stupid me shit shit shit shit shit shit shit shit

  • Both wars were started for different ways,

    However, in contrast to WWII, where the Allies went from town to town, in upfront combat, in both Vietnam and Iraq, the enemy was able to sneak across borders that, politically, we could not infringe on. The battle of Hue in Vietnam was fought with a strict set of rules of engagement being that Hue was the "cultural center of Vietnam" meaning that we were essentially fighting with a hand tied behind our back.

  • Both wars were started for different ways,

    However, in contrast to WWII, where the Allies went from town to town, in upfront combat, in both Vietnam and Iraq, the enemy was able to sneak across borders that, politically, we could not infringe on. The battle of Hue in Vietnam was fought with a strict set of rules of engagement being that Hue was the "cultural center of Vietnam" meaning that we were essentially fighting with a hand tied behind our back.

  • The Vietnam war and the Iraq war were fought for different reasons, which makes any comparison moot.

    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.

    Posted by: F Clayton
  • These are both different situations

    I have been studying the Vietnam War for quite a while, and learnt a lot i didn't know. The Americans and their allies were involved in this was because they didnt want North Vietnam to win against South Vietnam to become a communist country. Even though American politicans lost the war, their military actually won the war. The Communists in North Vietnam actually signed a peace treaty, effectively surrendering. But the U.S. Congress didn't hold up its end of the bargain. So there are different sides. Yes civilians were killed and a lot of violence did happen (Agent Orange - affecting millions still today). I do agree that it is a bit like the Iran War, but definitely different situations.

  • Both wars were fueled by very different ideology.

    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.

  • They have similarites, but more differences.

    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.

  • No, because there are not many similarities between the Iraq and Vietnam Wars, where one country was in conflict with itself, and the other was not.

    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.

    Posted by: 5h3rIsdead
  • The Vietnam War and the Iraqi war are two completely different wars, because they were/are fought for different reasons.

    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.

    Posted by: aerosmithgirl12
  • These are two completely different situations.

    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.

    Posted by: 5h035Bow

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.