Political Crossfire Forums

[Dookiestix]

Anyone catch the White House website regarding Bush's visit to Vietnam? They posted the wrong flag on their site. Instead of the new Vietnam flag, they used the old South Vietnam flag that hasn't been used since 1975.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15716229/

[sLiPpY]

Dookiestix wrote: Anyone catch the White House website regarding Bush's visit to Vietnam? They posted the wrong flag on their site. Instead of the new Vietnam flag, they used the old South Vietnam flag that hasn't been used since 1975.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15716229/

That wasn't a mistake. :wink:

[Vulcidian]

Rankor and Pissing wrote: Vulcidian wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: Vietnam and Iraq are not the same war, not the same effects and not for the same reasons. Again, flawed logic.

Hmm? Then the comparison of fighting a local insurgency lacks merit?
Occupying a Country and fighting the local population for control of their lands lacks merit?

I see it so clearly, not, thanks !

Comparing a China backed communist war with a religious zelot based jihad does lack merit
Comparing an Asian conflict of the 1960's to a Middle East conflict of the 21st century lacks merit
Comparing occupation and policing of a conquored nation (Iraq) versus a conventional war with a front line within a nation that has not been conquored lacks merit

You're welcome.


So we immerse ourselves in a War in a 3rd World type country with harsh terrain.

We are caught in a war against nationalists and fanatics backed by other rival organizations of ours.

We are currently not making headway. We appear to be stuck in a cycle of violence with casulaties steadily rising. And this is NOTHING like Vietnam?

Here's a link showing how many troops we had in Vietnam: www.commondreams.org/headlines/080900-01.htm

" 1966 400,000 US troops in Vietnam, rising to 500,000 in 1967"

We couldn't win in Vietnam with three times as many troops.

So the first lesson we should learn is that 150000 troops is surely not enough to stabilize the country. But Bush hasn't learned that either.

So no one is saying that Iraq and Vietnam are the same war. But they are very comparable. And it is obvious we haven't learned from Vietnam, and Bush is making worse mistakes than we made back then.


Perhaps the only reason our casulaties aren't so high as they were in Vietnam, is that we don't have as many men to target? Not as many men to try and enforce order?

As many comparisons that you and ROM make that may make it seem similiar, there are just as many I can list that makes it different. The second thing about Iraq is, the standing army was defeated, in very short order, twice. Vietnam was never an occupation of the entire country and a war strictly against a terrorist network. As much as you may both kid yourselves about it - they are religious zealots. If they were not, they would not repeat allah akbar's ever time they did something. They make video's of themselves, they are called martyrs by their comrades. Vietnam had zero, Nada to do with any religion.

They're not the same in almost any way - other than both are called "wars" and both have had the U.S. military involved. Just as there are no comparisons between Japanese kamikaze's with suicide bombers. Why? Because while both are sacrifices of a life to kill multiple "enemies" - one is emphatically religiously based (ie. 72 virgins and martyrdom) and the other was not - unless you believe the emperor of Japan indeed was a God.

The mistakes of Vietnam were learned boys and girls. There was little terroristic attacks and religious zealotry in 1969 in Laos, Cambodia or Vietnam and China wanted nothing to do with religion period (Communist Governments don't like the religions getting a foothold and undermining power bases). This is a different kind of war - one that can be controlled but not wiped out unless drastic measures were to be taken - which would make us as bad as they are.


Isn't there a similarity between the rigid stalinst dogmatism of the old-style Vietnam and Korea, and religious fundamentalism?

[Rankor and Pissing]

Vulcidian wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: Vulcidian wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: Richard Owl Mirror wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: Vietnam and Iraq are not the same war, not the same effects and not for the same reasons. Again, flawed logic.

Hmm? Then the comparison of fighting a local insurgency lacks merit?
Occupying a Country and fighting the local population for control of their lands lacks merit?

I see it so clearly, not, thanks !

Comparing a China backed communist war with a religious zelot based jihad does lack merit
Comparing an Asian conflict of the 1960's to a Middle East conflict of the 21st century lacks merit
Comparing occupation and policing of a conquored nation (Iraq) versus a conventional war with a front line within a nation that has not been conquored lacks merit

You're welcome.


So we immerse ourselves in a War in a 3rd World type country with harsh terrain.

We are caught in a war against nationalists and fanatics backed by other rival organizations of ours.

We are currently not making headway. We appear to be stuck in a cycle of violence with casulaties steadily rising. And this is NOTHING like Vietnam?

Here's a link showing how many troops we had in Vietnam: www.commondreams.org/headlines/080900-01.htm

" 1966 400,000 US troops in Vietnam, rising to 500,000 in 1967"

We couldn't win in Vietnam with three times as many troops.

So the first lesson we should learn is that 150000 troops is surely not enough to stabilize the country. But Bush hasn't learned that either.

So no one is saying that Iraq and Vietnam are the same war. But they are very comparable. And it is obvious we haven't learned from Vietnam, and Bush is making worse mistakes than we made back then.


Perhaps the only reason our casulaties aren't so high as they were in Vietnam, is that we don't have as many men to target? Not as many men to try and enforce order?

As many comparisons that you and ROM make that may make it seem similiar, there are just as many I can list that makes it different. The second thing about Iraq is, the standing army was defeated, in very short order, twice. Vietnam was never an occupation of the entire country and a war strictly against a terrorist network. As much as you may both kid yourselves about it - they are religious zealots. If they were not, they would not repeat allah akbar's ever time they did something. They make video's of themselves, they are called martyrs by their comrades. Vietnam had zero, Nada to do with any religion.

They're not the same in almost any way - other than both are called "wars" and both have had the U.S. military involved. Just as there are no comparisons between Japanese kamikaze's with suicide bombers. Why? Because while both are sacrifices of a life to kill multiple "enemies" - one is emphatically religiously based (ie. 72 virgins and martyrdom) and the other was not - unless you believe the emperor of Japan indeed was a God.

The mistakes of Vietnam were learned boys and girls. There was little terroristic attacks and religious zealotry in 1969 in Laos, Cambodia or Vietnam and China wanted nothing to do with religion period (Communist Governments don't like the religions getting a foothold and undermining power bases). This is a different kind of war - one that can be controlled but not wiped out unless drastic measures were to be taken - which would make us as bad as they are.


Isn't there a similarity between the rigid stalinst dogmatism of the old-style Vietnam and Korea, and religious fundamentalism?

Sure... both use terror and fear to get what they want. The ideologies are all different, the goals are different, almost everything is different. Communism was inherently opposed to religion though communists used religion when it suited them.

Let us now examine the question of the relationship of Christianity with Communism more precisely, to that particular form of communism which has now appeared as an attempt to realize the ideas of socialism. This form of communism emerged in history as a sworn and bitter enemy of Christianity. For its part, Christianity recognizes it as completely alien and inimical with itself.

FULL LINK

[Geronimo]

The Iraq war is definately a crusade. Bin laden at first just wanted us to get our air base away from Mecca, and basically leave them alone. People tend to forget, this whole war was about Palestine, not Iraq, anyway.