Poll: Is Iraq another Vietnam?

Well, this isn't about liberalism or conservatism. As I have said, there are a lot of TRUE conservatives (not neocons) out there who hate Bush and his destruction of the constitution. True, old-school conservatives (which there are few of today in congress) are more like Libertarians than they are the modern-day version of Republicans who immerse themselves in partisan politics. So I really don't want to cast all as one.

As far as the global-elite, it doesn't surprise me that you think globalism is a "conspiracy theory," since I doubt you, as well as a lot of people, have really read into it.

If "illuminati" is a hard word for you to grasp, then I'll use words like the Bilderberg Group, the CFR and the Trilateral Commission instead, all of which are globalist entities that fall under the "illuminati" category. Illuminati is just a very general term. I don't care for that word myself. I prefer to simply call them secret societies, which they more or less are.

 

Source??
I find it hard to believe that only one person would die in a whole year.... Anyone else?

I'm pretty sure this is plaigarism.

 

Yeah, and there are also democrats who support Bush b/c they know Kerry is a quack.

 

Source??
I'm pretty sure this is plaigarism.

Yes, it's "plagiarism," stolen from sources like the Pentagon and Arlington National Cemetery, the Vietnam memorial wall, and veterans' groups.

I find it hard to believe that only one person would die in a whole year.... Anyone else?

Actually, the very first was Col. Peter Dewey, who was killed in Vietnam in 1945 (he was the son of a congressman, believe it or not- my, how times changed). Some of the numbers will be a little off just due to definitions- where you draw the line and say "okay it wasn't really a war until this date." But just like the Iraq War, casualties were relatively low in the early years of the war. The USA had been involved in combat operations in Vietnam for almost two decades before casualties approached where they now stand in the Iraq War.

According to the Pentagon and the Arlington National Cemetery, the first person officially recognized as killed in the Vietnam War was Air Force Tech Sgt. Richard B. Fitzgibbon, Jr., murdered in Vietnam by, of all people, a fellow airman on June 8, 1956 (his son was also killed, years later, in Vietnam). In actuality, the first American actually killed in combat by Vietnamese communist forces was much earlier, September 26, 1945; his name was A. Peter Dewey. While Dien Bien Phu is usually remembered as a French rout, two Americans were killed during that operation as well.

I believe that the first name on the Vietnam Wall is Dale Buis, killed in 1959, see Panel 1-E, Row 1.

Others might argue that the war's beginning should be marked with the first major US defeat, which would probably be the battle at Ap Bac in January of 1963, when a tiny band of guerillas with very little weaponry (mainly M-1's) defeated forces four times their number- forces who had the backing of fighter-bombers, aerial recon, helicopter gunships, and armored vehicles (see Neil Sheehan's book about John Paul Vann for the excruciating details). Still others might place the start date at the resolutions following the 60s version of the falsified WMDs thing, the Tonkin Gulf resolutions.

In any case, we got into that war slowly and gradually, with the argument "we can't back out NOW" prevailing then as it may yet prevail now. And like then, many of us were fooled- at first.

More info at

http://justfuckinggoogleit.com
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/apdewey.htm
http://www.thisdayinhistory.com/tdih/tdih.jsp?category=vietnamwar&month=10272961&day=10272991
http://theindependent.com/stories/021403/opi_letheby14.shtml
http://25thaviation.org/id275.htm

PS- John Paul Vann, mentioned above, is one of the more interesting characters of that war, and many consider Sheehan's bio of Vann to be the best book ever written about Vietnam. The book opens with Sheehan's son, pacing the floor, about to meet President Nixon, fretting over his plan- to hand Nixon HALF of his draft card while shaking his hand. Vann was a hardcore warrior with personal friends in the peace movement, and Sheehan's account shows this as somewhat coherent in its own way. While much of it is NOT applicable to Iraq, it's still a great read, and can easily be found in any second-hand bookstore or library (full title is "A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam")

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/jpvann.htm

has some excerpts and info for anyone curious.

 

just to say

supreme civilization what the west who went to war
with germany whos leader thought he was in the country of the
supreme human..

i feel you have not been reading your history enough
the west has forced many cultures to decline due to
our greed and sanctions every time our government
beieves we are in worry of terror from other cultures...
now if you look closer you will see a pattern
to the wests way of sweeping across the earth and destroying
any hope the east has its only a matter of time before
the west crumbles to nothing maybe we will never see
this happen but our future families ie grandchildren will,,,,

now is this another vietnam
no just another crusade thats allowing the west
to be more comfortable and get fat quick....

a supreme civilization is not one that would kill others
for thier colour its one of all life working living together
on this earth with love in heart and ideas for living
in head then you will see freedom/

so now we come to us,the west
how will we survive without the easts cheap
labour for football shoes...
for makeup....
designer outfits...
cheap foods,,,,
child work forces...
oil,diamonds, minerals,even the company next
have their clothes made in some poor eastrn
world...
so go do your shopping and find where all our
nice things come from ....

this is a war that has never really stopped
its about religion who what person was here first
to order the rest about.... i suppose you feel
jesus was white hahahaha.
love n peace from saff
for at the end
of the day i fear nothing.....
this is freedom not to fear what the world leaders
tell us..but to see the truth they want you
to be blind......

 

Saddam was actually quite progressive in some respects. Had there not been a degree of personal animosity on Bush's part, a prospect for big profits and big oil, it's entirely possible that Bush would have buddied up to him enthusiastically after Saudi Arabia attacked the US on 9/11/01. Reagan liked and supported Saddam, and saw him as useful as a useful tool to hold back the Islamic world. Had Saddam stayed out of Kuwait, odds are pretty good (maybe in four odds, perhaps) we'd be supporting him today as our chief ally in the "War On Tur," in my opinion. History is interesting for many reasons, one of which is the fact that sometimes the tiniest of factors end up having HUGE consequences.

 

I'm pretty sure you got this information from a web site or a book... I doubt you remembered that many numbers from doing research. You copied and pasted that list. So where from?

 

For god's sake, do you even read these posts? If you actually think that someone is lying about something as easy to find out as the deaths in Vietnam do the simple research yourself. But since you can't seem to read I am quoting her response (and yes, I plagerised it from SunLion) again here, even though it is just a few posts up.

Post #24

 

So only white, european crusaders kill people because of color? I guess that the arabs are defending themselves by attacking Israel for being jewish about every 15 years or so? Yeah listen sweetheart, do some research and you'll find you arab world is backward and corrupt. Guess what else? History is written by the winners, and we are sure to win in any conflict over your backward, soviet supplied arab matyrs.

 

No, it's worse. Or it will become worse.
During the Vietnam war, the constructed idea of a "communist" was quite well-defined. What's the definition of a terrorist? It apparently means "someone we don't like" or something like that. There's no clear definition, because that's the dilemma of the coalition: if they define terrorism, they know that the definition will include themselves.
Lower moral- and higher suicide-rates among american soldiers after one year in Iraq, than the soldiers after four year in Vietnam!!!
Many of Saddam Husseins soldiers and bureaucrats has been hired by the US occupation force. Nowadays the coalition is fighting against people who was against Saddam Husseins Baath-party. That's just one of many paradoxes in Iraq right now. The soldiers are getting mad, the rebels are getting mad, and the iraqis just getting more poor. The coalition has already done enough damage, and now the question is: "what's the lightest worst case scenario in Iraq?" - let's choose that. And let's hope that the state leaders in coalition countries... US, UK, Italy, Poland, Denmark, Norway, etc... once will be punished as the war criminals they are. Perhaps, someday we decide to crush the world order of today.
There's no control in Iraq anylonger. Not even Baghdad is under control anylonger.
Falluja is sunni, and the americans are bombing the 300,000 inhabitan city right now, because the city is not yet safe enough to go in with land troops! And they try to tell us that the war is over!? I think it has just begun.

Falluja is not the only city, and it's not only sunni-locations as well. The shia southern Iraq has also mobilized partisans, and there are obviously no solution to make it better, as long US troops are in Iraq.
So pull out, and admit that you lost the oil and your geopolitical middle-east-hegemony, Bush.
...And greetings to Sharon, Bush... Bravo, cowboy Bush.

 

"Supreme Civilization"? Isn't that like thinking your religion (Islam) is better than all other religions (Judaism and Christianity), and that anyone who believes anything but your religion should be killed? Come to think of it, that idea does sort of sound familiar.

Nice to know you're so enthusiastic about the idea of your grandchildren being killed. But hey, it's their fault right? All Americans deserve to die simply because they do, don't they?

Um.....yeah. Try to be a little more vague, I don't think you're ambiguous enough yet.

I agree. Any society whose core doctrine (the Koran) sanctions the killing of Jews, Christians, gays, and women who don't obey their fathers and husbands, as well as the complete and utter intolerance of all ethnic groups besides their own is an obstacle to the world. Nice to know you're with me there.

Because nobody outside of America and Europe has Nike stores and shopping malls right?

I guess you could say it's about religion. I mean, the Muslim extremists want us dead because we're Christians right? So yeah, it's a war of religion.

And that's besides the fact that there are huge numbers of Muslims in India, Indonedia, Pakistan, Russia, Eastern Europe, Africa, and Asia (predominantly SE Asia) and none of those places are considered enemies of ours. So it must be a war of religion......

 

That's the crisis of todays leftwing. They oppose a ghost. They oppose neoliberalism, while Hans-Hermann Hoppe, the american libertarian, known for publicly defending his fascist views, and rejecting them as idiosyncracies for the libertarians. On the other hand is the neo-cons. Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Kristol, Ashcroft etc... but not Bush, -cuz he's the puppet). It's weird to think that most neocons actually don't believe in the christianity they preach. Neoconservatism is no "lumberjack-ideology", but it's a very, very 'elitist' academic bunch of intellectuals, who actually used to be Trotzkists (during the cold war)!!!!!
So it's neocons vs. libertarians. It's a new rightwing, but the leftwing still think that neoliberalism is the ruling ideology. They have opposed a ghost instead of opposing the ruling rightwing ideology. That explains the crisis of todays leftwing, I think. Attac has almost becomed old-fashioned in the global network! The leftwing must define itself within social structures, rather than within the political system. It's a power to be in opposition, and networks is the future of the leftwing, and it will break the neoconservative handicap of not understanding the global network-conditions.

-But after the fall of the wall, those elitists immediately changed Marx with Christianity; they are intellectuals, you see, so they were the first to know when to change ideology. Just another sign to the leftwing to redefine itself. Neoconservatism has becomed more dangerous than neoliberalism, but postmodern left (like Attac) can't change it. Attac introduced global network structure as a progressive political ressource. It has failed, and now I think it's time for a social network to take over such political networks.
-Social networks are neoconservatist ideologies weak point; they can't answer it or defend its importance, because the neocons believe in the importance of ideology to control, repress, and make fear, not only abroad, but definately also inside the country. That's the point of militarism, which is the brother-ideology of neoconservatism. Militarism is an ideology that believe in that fear is the best way to control the masses. Militarism is the ideology that want to make a state of fear in the society they govern, just like the fear they make in Iraq, for instance. Domestic fear, and fear abroad... that's the password to neoconservatism and militarism; ...fear uniform people. Bush might talk about freedom, but I don't see any free american these days. Some has said that US is in a "pre-fascist" state right now. The black-white distinction can be interpreted by any ruling hegemony. good or evil. reality shows or books. See?




love,
noose.

 

No it's not another vietnam. We kicked butt in Iraq!!!

 

"kicked" - that's in past. Does that mean that you don't kick butt in Iraq anylonger?

 

A reporter for the conservative Wall Street Journal describes the situation in Iraq...

"I can't go grocery shopping any more, can't eat in restaurants, can't strike a conversation with strangers, can't look for stories, can't drive in any thing but a full armored car, can't go to scenes of breaking news stories, can't be stuck in traffic, can't speak English outside, can't take a road trip, can't say I'm an American, can't linger at checkpoints, can't be curious about what people are saying, doing, feeling. And can't and can't... my most pressing concern every day is not to write a kick-ass story but to stay alive... If under Saddam it was a 'potential' threat, under the Americans it has been transformed to 'imminent and active threat,' a foreign policy failure bound to haunt the United States for decades to come... In four days, 110 people died and over 300 got injured in Baghdad alone. The numbers are so shocking that the ministry of health -- which was attempting an exercise of public transparency by releasing the numbers -- has now stopped disclosing them. This is in Shiite land, the population that was supposed to love America for liberating Iraq... cops are being murdered by the dozens every day... almost all projects have come to a halt... I heard an educated Iraqi say today that if Saddam Hussein were allowed to run for elections he would get the majority of the vote... One could argue that Iraq is already lost beyond salvation."

This is what our president expects us to sacrifice our kids for? More than a thousand dead American troops already? No, an election isn't enough. These people should be prosecuted- felonies that kill people are called murders, and in places- oh, like Texas, for instance- the murder of fellow Americans sometimes results in a very stiff penalty.

Paul Waldman puts it brilliantly:
"As the campaign comes into its final weeks, President Bush seems to be lapsing into a caricature of himself. As the debate went on, Bush began talking more and more about…talking. Not about what he has done in four years and what the consequences of those actions have been, but about what he says and what John Kerry says, what messages are sent, what statements are made. Ironically for a president whose problems with his mother tongue are legendary, Bush's campaign has come down to this: The things that I say are superior to the things that he says. I will continue to say good things, strong things. Because nothing is more important that what you say. So I'll be saying things. My opponent won't say things the way I will. If you re-elect me, I will continue saying things, giving signals, sending messages. God bless America."

He follows this with overwhelming evidence entirely in Bush's own words:

http://gadflyer.com/articles/?ArticleID=223

The time is ticking down for the Bush Regime, and soon we'll be watching your guys stand trials for murder on live television.

 

So how dumb will you feel in 4 years when your boy Kerry hasn't pulled troops out? How stupid will you feel when the death toll reaches say 40 thousand? Will it then be Kerry's fault and will you then be calling him names and putting your hate out on him? Will you stand up like you are doing now(on online forums of all places) to be heard and say that Clinton(that would be the female Clinton) is the one to rescue our soldiers? Shut up already. All of you. Not a single one of you are willing to do anything more than type on forums and hold a sign. You scream and cry for a new government, when will you take up arms and make it so? Answer...never, so sit down, grab another bag of chips, and go read a blog for your news source.

 

hi there
so only white european crusaders kill people yes they do
and have done,and still do.. other wise why and how would our countries be so fat..so full of material things ...
so full of all other resources that the east offers,or shall i say takes
and as for the isreal and jewish conflict,where have you been
the christians have created alot of this conflict by crusading
around the globe telling all other cultures they are wrong
for example ,native americans native scotts native irish
not to mention the east but im afraid you are blind to
our roll in the crusades from the past to today.
as for russia well just look how we treated the people of the revoulution
the communists that were so scary, wrong they wanted a world
to live and work in with a unitied shared commitment..
but then again the west invaded and openly caused the divide
of today.. choose who you believe but remember be true to yourself
and read more history.

maybe its that ,this rather that you are afraid of
the western way has created more conflict more mass murder
by telling other cultures they are wrong causing tribe against tribe...
oh im sure one day it will change but not with
the oppressor being a western male
and the oppressed being woman man child of any other belief..
thank you love n peace from saff
i do not blame white man i blame their lack in understanding
nature mankind and how to live.

 

I agree and am prety much that way inclined as well.. but i don't like comparisons

I am somewhat glad this thread was started ...it is a thread about is iraq another vietnam .. i have asked people and they just talk about lies body counts and the futility.. I don't think its is another vietnam going by that ... just people who appose the iraq war almost wish it , because vietnam was a mess its a 'good' refrence to use to make this war seem the same. I have also heard some say Bush is like Hitler and his goverment are a bunch of natzis .. again not true..its vulgar disrespectful and just realy sad that people that appose this war should stoop to such levels. Peace is good but all i hear from most peacful people is venom . No comparisons should be made about anything ..it like looking for the new elvis or the new britney... such things are absolutly pointless and meaningless.

 

Yes, isn't it grotesque? Only two candidates with almost similar opinions for more than 200 million voters. It should be 6 billion voters, ofcourse, but that's another issue...

 

Well since Kerry didn't start the war then that is probably a no.

I forgot that you actually knew each and every one of us personally.

You have anger issues, Bandit. Your posts here are always quite angry, and usually uncalled for. Are you coming here to yell at us to make up for what you can't be mad at in your personal life? Ever thought of therapy?