The View From 1776

Is Iraq, Was Vietnam, a Quagmire?

Senator Kennedy and his fellow liberals long for an ignominious defeat in Iraq; anything to discredit President Bush.  Almost from the start of the military action, they sought to identify Iraq with Vietnam and the false image of quagmire and defeat projected by the media in the 1960s.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 01/30 at 06:03 PM
  1. We won the battles but were prohibited from engaging in an all out war.

    In Iraq, we were allowed an all out war and thus, won the war in a short period of time. However, Desert Storm was the mistake. We were limited in that one and like other military engagements forced to stop and have a cease-fire too soon and that meant we had to go back and finish the job.

    Too many people think of what is going on in Iraq as a continuation of the war against Saddam. Once we defeated Saddam, we turned the nation back over to the new Iraq government and then became their ally and "policeman" while they tried to build up their government, hold elections and rebuild their military, police and security forces. We have not been at war with Iraq or even their insurgents as much as defending the Iraq government from both insurgents and foreign intruders who want to keep Iraq from having a democratic government.

    The only similarity is that we are limited. In Vietnam our own and other governments limited us in how far we could carry the war into North Vietnam. In Iraq, the Iraq government limits us because they wanted to try and "win" the people to the new government with appeasement and negotiation instead of an all out military action against people like Sadr.

    I think we had to bow to that wish. If we didn't then, the people would have never thought the Iraq government would be "independent." That, of course, means lives will be lost and if there was a mistake it was in assuming the new government would get the kind of support that allowed a more rapid development of an army and police that could be trusted not to have "death squads" due to terrorists joining those organizations or old hate being so strong that members would take advantage of their authority to create the "death squads."

    Those kinds of things have greatly slowed the progess in buiding the forces needed for Iraq to take over control of the nation. But, the greatest problem has been the same problem we had in Vietnam when I served.

    Politicans that get on the nightly news to give aid and comfort to the enemy by giving them hope they could defeat us. They didn't demoralize our troops probably but, they sure gave the enemy hope and helped them in their obtaining recruits and funding and weapons. Representatives are to fight those things out behind closed doors and then present a united front in public. We are not a democracy and during times of war, those things are not to be discussed in public by the representatives.

    It is one thing for us to debate it but, when the government leaders do, then the enemy knows they have a chance. During WW II there was a saying that "Loose lips sink ships." Today's loose lips said, "use IED on these vehicles as they don't have as much armor." These soldiers don't have full body armor. These troops are undermanned. These troops are too tired. These troops have poor leaders. These troops are demoralized.

    That isn't just loose lips, it is treason when politician take those concerns from behind closed doors and broadcast them to the enemy and all nations funding and supply weapons and men to the enemy. They did it to us in Vietnam and they are doing it again because that is how socialists work. Remember, several times in their principles and strategy on their web site, they refer to their use of "radical democracy." In a democracy, the people themselves are brought in to vote for or against instead of representative working things out as our nation was designed to do.

    Remember that even the Communist web site was begging their members vote for Kerry who would further their goals better than the GOP. Socialists and Communists have the same goal of taking over but socialists use "radical democracy" to do it and they have been very good at it.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  01/31  at  02:30 AM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.