The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Iraq is not Vietnam, it is much worse > Comments

Iraq is not Vietnam, it is much worse : Comments

By Tom Clifford, published 9/7/2007

By comparing Iraq to Vietnam is President Bush softening the blow of a radical change in policy?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Just to get something straight, I'm so old I can remember 10 presidents. Of these Bush is the worst I can remember by a huge margin. When he gave the order to invade Iraq I thought he had lost his marbles. I now realise he had none to lose in the first place.

But, having said all that, now what? Leaving aside dubious historical parallels with Vietnam and Cambodia, where do we go from here?

Right now coalition troops are being asked to put their lives on the line in a futile bid to stop Iraqis killing each other. Over 3,000 Americans have already lost their lives. Mercifully, accidents aside, no Australian soldier had died in Iraq.

But do we have the right to ask our troops to risk their lives in what we all know is a hopeless mission?

I think not.

What happens if the coalition withdraws?

Most likely the Iraqis will get on with the business of killing each other, or not, as they choose. Perhaps Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia will be drawn into a proxy war in Iraq. The war may spread with Iran aiding the Shia in Saudi Arabia and the Saudis and other Arab states aiding Kurds, Sunnis and Azeri irridentists in Iran. Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia may intensify their efforts to destabilise each other.

All this is appalling but, realistically, is there anything we can do to stop it?

I think not.

The only sensible policy is immediate withdrawal and a determined program to lessen our dependence on Middle-Eastern oil.

When people say that alternatives to oil will be expensive ask them one question:

Will substitutes actually be more expensive than the all-up cost of continued reliance on the Middle-East for our transport fuel?
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Monday, 9 July 2007 10:31:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think there are similarities to Vietnam, especially with the way the fear-mongering far left have used public opinion against in reality is something that needs to be expanded to the entire region, not withdrawn.

It is through public pressure that the US left Vietnam, and that was stupid. Vietnam is a Communist dump where people are imprisoned for criticising the government.

It seems obvious that everywhere the US and west goes is left better for it. One only need point out this truth by looking at Korea, with the South prosperous, and the people have rights, and the North a communist dump where people are starving.

Even if the US pull out of Iraq they'll be back soon enough because Muslims, on the large, are intolerant bigots.

Their media channels show the hatred on a daily basis, as well as (which I find quite astonishing given how backward they're values are) supremacist intent.

I believe the war on terror is really a war on fanatical Islam, and rightly so. Pakistan, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia, all need to be brought into this war.

There is no point fighting them unless we stop the production lines.

I think this writer is completely wrong, and has a logic all his own. To say that there were no terrorists in Iraq before the invasion is outrageous, utter garbage.

Saddam Hussein was a terrorist. We must not make a distinction between state terror and fanatical groups. They are one and the same, share the same Islamist goals, and need to be destroyed.

The hypocrisy of Islamists in wanting to use western technology to implement their savage religious value system is laughable. The idea of a racist caliphate will never be realised.

The west run the planet, but even if we didn't, and only China was around, do you think they'd be fighting Islamists with all the rules we impose on ourselves?

Of course not...
Posted by Benjamin, Monday, 9 July 2007 10:33:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The only comparison between Iraq and Vietnam is the fact that the Coalition of the Willing have stay too long. The terrorist will only stay while the US is present.

As for the future, Saddam will be replaced by the Shia and the Kurds will rule in the North.

Why will the Kurds rule in the North, simple, every nation in the region wants a place where these people can be forced to live. You cannot name one nation in the region who wants these people living amonst their own.

The Kurds will have their own country, but it will be a place of great hardship for them.

When the US leaves Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing will fold up like a deck of cards and forget about the Iraqi people.

From the point of history, Vietnam all over again, they will leave like a mongrel dog with its tail between its legs.
Posted by southerner, Monday, 9 July 2007 10:49:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
...in a way, I hope we do pull out of Iraq.

I personally don't think non-westerners are ready for democracy. We've seen what they think democracy is with Palestine, not only voting in murderous bigots, but mob rule.

The minority Christians there, as everywhere else in the racist, intolerant middle-east, are persecuted shockingly.

Hamas should be bombed just for that.

Arabs aren't ready for our civilised ways yet, and they aren't worth the western lives sacrificed. What a waste, young men and women dying so bigots can dominate each other.

Their racism is unbelievable, they know our ways are superior and all want to live in the west, yet are so racist they want to hang onto their tribal values - corruption, decadence, immorality, and vile sectarianism.

Think about how xenophobic they are to still be killing each other after so many centuries. How dare we think we could impose civilisation on these brutes!

Those young soldiers lost in this quest were sacrificed for noble ideals surely, but naive.

George Bush' vision to create a stable Iraq can never work while the people living their are racist bigots.

It's the same in Islamic Diasporas in the west - all they care about is their own tribe, which is why they have xenophobic marriage practices.

One would think Muslims here would be jumping up and down about turning Iraq into a western country, but it can't work as they have no goodwill.

This is why they're communities are all crime-ridden, dumps, and their youth sexually harrass young women. They have no respect for those outside their tribe, their clan.

They need to go through their own enlightenment as we westerners did.

They need to learn that you shouldn't hate someone because they have different skin, you should have empathy.

What Iraq needs is another Attaturk, although even his work is being undone by filthy Islamists in Turkey.

It's time our leaders understand that we are at war with Islamic values - and rightly so.
Posted by Benjamin, Monday, 9 July 2007 11:25:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just as well we only get two posts a day. Now we don't have to put up with this drivel from Benjamin for another twenty four hours. Get real mate.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Monday, 9 July 2007 12:41:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When John Howard was last in Vietnam he said that he had not changed his mind about the Vietnam War. His pro-war views were the same as ever. He did not elaborate because none of the journalists asked him which part he had been right about. I'd like to hear that!

I wondered why they didn't. Was it ignorance of what had happened or the glaring inability of many in the media to ask an un-prepared question?

The obvious similarity is that he just does not get it. He will not shift until the Americans do. Vietnam was a civil war before we intervened. We have created one in Iaq. Iraq is paying a heavy price for the stubbornness of Howard and Bush.

Kevin Rennie "Labor View from Broome" http://laborview.blogspot.com/
Posted by top ender, Monday, 9 July 2007 1:52:41 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy