Most recent edit on 2005-10-10 09:56:03 by EschaTon
Additions:
At the present time in the Middle East there is a crisis. America has invaded and occupied the countries which contain roughly 55% of the world’s oil (Freeman, paragraph 13). Let us regress now and find [It will prove instructive (?)] a suitable precedent for today’s War on Terrorism. Back [I]n the late 1960’s a war was in the midst of being fought and lost by the United States. In 1969, the troop total [troop deployment] reached its peak at 543,400 troops [soldiers] stationed in and around Vietnam (Rutgers, p. 2). For years after this the fighting would continue, even though the troops were largely withdrawing. A total loss of 58,000 American soldiers, and nearly three million Vietnamese was incurred in the Vietnamese war [This sentence needs to be more foreceful. This is a striking point and it is weakly worded]. I cannot say that the War on Terrorism has the exact same numbers as Vietnam [Don't say this ... your argument will bear this out or it won't]. However, I can say that it may have the potential to do so. [To do so? What do you mean here?]
The Vietnam War was kicked into high gear by something called the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This came into effect on the account of a Vietnamese ship firing at an American patrol boat. This claim is presently believed to have been staged, or even fabricated. [These points don't agree ... they make a claim that an event happened and then claim that they didn't happen] The modern day equivalent of this is September 11th, connections to Al Qaeda, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Osama Bin Laden [you are comparing an event to a pereson, an event, an organization, and a concept. This lacks in parallelism]. One other event that seems to jump out and smack me in the face [this is too conversational] is the fact that we were welcomed into these countries as “liberators,” as if we were going to solve all of their problems. [We were not welcomed into Vietnam as liberators. We also weren't welcomed in Iraq]
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States has portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Furthermore, Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as [was] something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. [This is an interesting point, but it isn't clearly stated] The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for [with] the Vietnamese and even [or] Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. [Really? Do you want to, maybe, support that claim?] By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves. [This isn't a sentence]
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others [A less obvious similarity] is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth [but you just argued that we were doing this in the 1960s in Vietnam. I'm so confused!]. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the [The phrase] “policeman of the world” [is often applied to the US] and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the head. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded ["inter"?]. It’s possible that Iraq is the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned. [why? what evidence do you have for these claims?]
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature [another] Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Hence, there is less ground to account for. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq. [This is both right and wrong, all at once. Trenches were in WWI, for one thing, but the US was unprepared (and remained unwilling to change) in both Vietnam and Iraq. You should have brought in mention of the fact that the Vietnam War was, officially, referred to as a "police action" and that the word "police" is often used in discussing tactics in Iraq]
One instance that held us back in Vietnam was the fact that the Chinese army would support the Vietcong if our Imperialism got out of hand [No!!! The Chinese and the Vietnamese hated each other and actually fought a border war after our withdrawal from Vietnam. The Russians were supporting the NVA in an effort to get to both the US and the Chinese. More research might have revealed this]. However, this is simply not the case in Iraq; our enemies do not have immediate back up if our cruelty approaches Hitler-like levels [nice with the Hitler reference]. I believe that we chose our enemy well this time. If it had been Iran, Hussein would have assisted, even though Iran is a formidable enemy [you are aware of the Iran-Iraq war, right? Further what precludes Iran from having become involved in Iraq?]. I believe that we realized our capabilities militarily, and then chose a suitable enemy. In Vietnam, if we would have done this we quite possibly would have won, but we did not have that luxury. [Not really ... the US honestly thought they were going to be fighting a bunch of farmers armed with sticks (a lot of times they were). The failure in Vietnam was probably a result of our inability to understand the will of the North Vietnamese, but then we are getting into the realm of the causal]
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to the Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that I have argued against them quite clearly. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase militarily. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may exactly like Vietnam, but an accelerated version [huh?]. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism [wow ... so what?]. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad [I'm still not with you]. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If in the Vietnam War, United States Soldiers extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust? [I'm totally lost at this point ... how did you get here?]
[This paper indicates a lack of proofreading (incomplete sentences, missing words, etc.), a lack of solid research, and a lack of coherent structure. It is not enough to make shocking claims in this class, one must be willing to support these claims with facts. The usage of troop statistics at the beginning of the paper is nice but the trend is not continued. For instance, if you want to compare the War on Terror to the Holocausts, do you think it might be a good idea to say why this comparison can be made? Because your paper never makes subtantiates this claim.]
Deletions:
At the present time in the Middle East there is a crisis. America has invaded and occupied the countries which contain roughly 55% of the world’s oil (Freeman, paragraph 13). Let us regress now and find a suitable precedent for today’s War on Terrorism. Back in the late 1960’s a war was in the midst of being fought and lost by the United States. In 1969, the troop total reached its peak at 543,400 troops stationed in and around Vietnam (Rutgers, p. 2). For years after this the fighting would continue, even though the troops were largely withdrawing. A total loss of 58,000 American soldiers, and nearly three million Vietnamese was incurred in the Vietnamese war. I cannot say that the War on Terrorism has the exact same numbers as Vietnam. However, I can say that it may have the potential to do so.
The Vietnam War was kicked into high gear by something called the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This came into effect on the account of a Vietnamese ship firing at an American patrol boat. This claim is presently believed to have been staged, or even fabricated. The modern day equivalent of this is September 11th, connections to Al Qaeda, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Osama Bin Laden. One other event that seems to jump out and smack me in the face is the fact that we were welcomed into these countries as “liberators,” as if we were going to solve all of their problems.
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States has portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Furthermore, Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the head. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq is the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Hence, there is less ground to account for. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq.
One instance that held us back in Vietnam was the fact that the Chinese army would support the Vietcong if our Imperialism got out of hand. However, this is simply not the case in Iraq; our enemies do not have immediate back up if our cruelty approaches Hitler-like levels. I believe that we chose our enemy well this time. If it had been Iran, Hussein would have assisted, even though Iran is a formidable enemy. I believe that we realized our capabilities militarily, and then chose a suitable enemy. In Vietnam, if we would have done this we quite possibly would have won, but we did not have that luxury.
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to the Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that I have argued against them quite clearly. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase militarily. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may exactly like Vietnam, but an accelerated version. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If in the Vietnam War, United States Soldiers extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust?
Edited on 2005-10-06 18:50:49 by HimEros
Additions:
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Hence, there is less ground to account for. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq.
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to the Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that I have argued against them quite clearly. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase militarily. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may exactly like Vietnam, but an accelerated version. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If in the Vietnam War, United States Soldiers extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust?
Deletions:
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq.
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to the Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that these will be removed through time. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may not be at all like Vietnam. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If Vietnam extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust?
Edited on 2005-10-06 18:46:38 by HimEros
Additions:
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the head. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq is the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
Deletions:
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the head. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq was the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
Edited on 2005-10-06 18:46:02 by HimEros
Additions:
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the head. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq was the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
Deletions:
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the edge. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq was the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
Edited on 2005-10-06 18:45:02 by HimEros
Additions:
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States has portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Furthermore, Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
Deletions:
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States has portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
Edited on 2005-10-06 18:44:29 by HimEros
Additions:
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States has portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
Deletions:
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
Edited on 2005-10-06 17:12:52 by HimEros
Additions:
Freeman, Robert. Is Iraq Another Vietnam? Actually, It May Become Worse. 19 April 2004. Common Dreams News Center. 3 October 2005. <http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0419-11.htm∞>
Geddis, Catherine. 1960’s Vietnam Time Line. October, 1998. Rutgers University. 3 Oct. 2005. <http://www.sec.rutgers.edu/njh/1960/vietnam/dates.htm∞>
Deletions:
Freeman, Robert. Is Iraq Another Vietnam? Actually, It May Become Worse. 19 April 2004. Common Dreams News Center. 3 October 2005. <http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0419-11.htm∞>
Geddis, Catherine. 1960’s Vietnam Time Line. October, 1998. Rutgers University. 3 Oct. 2005. <http://www.sec.rutgers.edu/njh/1960/vietnam/dates.htm∞>
Edited on 2005-10-06 17:12:02 by HimEros
Additions:
At the present time in the Middle East there is a crisis. America has invaded and occupied the countries which contain roughly 55% of the world’s oil (Freeman, paragraph 13). Let us regress now and find a suitable precedent for today’s War on Terrorism. Back in the late 1960’s a war was in the midst of being fought and lost by the United States. In 1969, the troop total reached its peak at 543,400 troops stationed in and around Vietnam (Rutgers, p. 2). For years after this the fighting would continue, even though the troops were largely withdrawing. A total loss of 58,000 American soldiers, and nearly three million Vietnamese was incurred in the Vietnamese war. I cannot say that the War on Terrorism has the exact same numbers as Vietnam. However, I can say that it may have the potential to do so.
The Vietnam War was kicked into high gear by something called the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This came into effect on the account of a Vietnamese ship firing at an American patrol boat. This claim is presently believed to have been staged, or even fabricated. The modern day equivalent of this is September 11th, connections to Al Qaeda, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Osama Bin Laden. One other event that seems to jump out and smack me in the face is the fact that we were welcomed into these countries as “liberators,” as if we were going to solve all of their problems.
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists; in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place. By combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that in this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the edge. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq was the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam. President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq.
One instance that held us back in Vietnam was the fact that the Chinese army would support the Vietcong if our Imperialism got out of hand. However, this is simply not the case in Iraq; our enemies do not have immediate back up if our cruelty approaches Hitler-like levels. I believe that we chose our enemy well this time. If it had been Iran, Hussein would have assisted, even though Iran is a formidable enemy. I believe that we realized our capabilities militarily, and then chose a suitable enemy. In Vietnam, if we would have done this we quite possibly would have won, but we did not have that luxury.
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to the Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that these will be removed through time. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may not be at all like Vietnam. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If Vietnam extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust?
Works Cited
Freeman, Robert. Is Iraq Another Vietnam? Actually, It May Become Worse. 19 April 2004. Common Dreams News Center. 3 October 2005. <http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0419-11.htm∞>
Geddis, Catherine. 1960’s Vietnam Time Line. October, 1998. Rutgers University. 3 Oct. 2005. <http://www.sec.rutgers.edu/njh/1960/vietnam/dates.htm∞>
Deletions:
At the present time in the Middle East there is a crisis. America has invaded and occupied the countries which contain roughly 55% of the world’s oil (Freeman, paragraph 13). Let us regress now and find a suitable precedent for today’s War on Terrorism. Back in the late 1960’s a war was in the midst of being fought and lost by the United States. In 1969, the troop total reached its peak at 543,400 troops stationed in and around Vietnam (Rutgers, p. 2). For years after this the fighting would continue, even though the troops were largely withdrawing. A total loss in this war of 58,000 American soldiers, and nearly three million Vietnamese was incurred in that war. I cannot say that the War on Terrorism has the exact same numbers as Vietnam; however I can say that it may have the potential to do so.
The Vietnam War was kicked into high gear by something called the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This came into effect on the account of a Vietnamese ship firing at an American patrol boat. This claim is presently believed to have been staged, or even fabricated. The modern day equivalent of this is September 11th, connections to Al Qaeda, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Osama Bin Laden. One other event that seems to jump out and smack me in the face was the fact that we were welcomed into these countries as “liberators,” as if we were going to solve all of their problems.
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists, and in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place, by combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the edge. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq was the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam, so President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq.
One instance that held us back in Vietnam was the fact that the Chinese army would support the Vietcong if our Imperialism got out of hand. However, this is simply not the case in Iraq; our enemies do not have immediate back up if our cruelty approaches Hitler-like levels. I believe that we chose our enemy well this time. If it had been Iran, Hussein would have assisted, even though Iran is a formidable enemy. I believe that we realized our capabilities militarily, and then chose a suitable enemy. In Vietnam, if we would have done this we quite possibly would have won, but we did not have that luxury.
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to The Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that these will be told out through time. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may not be at all like Vietnam. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If Vietnam extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust?
Oldest known version of this page was edited on 2005-10-04 14:44:10 by HimEros []
Page view:
The War on Terrorism vs. The Vietnam War
At the present time in the Middle East there is a crisis. America has invaded and occupied the countries which contain roughly 55% of the world’s oil (Freeman, paragraph 13). Let us regress now and find a suitable precedent for today’s War on Terrorism. Back in the late 1960’s a war was in the midst of being fought and lost by the United States. In 1969, the troop total reached its peak at 543,400 troops stationed in and around Vietnam (Rutgers, p. 2). For years after this the fighting would continue, even though the troops were largely withdrawing. A total loss in this war of 58,000 American soldiers, and nearly three million Vietnamese was incurred in that war. I cannot say that the War on Terrorism has the exact same numbers as Vietnam; however I can say that it may have the potential to do so.
The Vietnam War was kicked into high gear by something called the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This came into effect on the account of a Vietnamese ship firing at an American patrol boat. This claim is presently believed to have been staged, or even fabricated. The modern day equivalent of this is September 11th, connections to Al Qaeda, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Osama Bin Laden. One other event that seems to jump out and smack me in the face was the fact that we were welcomed into these countries as “liberators,” as if we were going to solve all of their problems.
Another similarity that has seemed to be more than coincidence is the fact that the United States portrayed the leaders of these countries to be fascist, horrible men. Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein were both portrayed as being the scum of the earth even though the United States helped install Hussein to power. Minh was largely portrayed as a belligerent communist, even though he appeared on the scene as something closer to a nationalist. Furthermore, the United States seem to always narrow their enemy down to one word doctrines, that may or may not be on the mark. In Vietnam, it was the Communists, and in Iraq, it is now the Terrorists. The United States uses these terms for anyone who sympathizes for the Vietnamese and even Iraqis. Our main goal in each of these wars was to make the world a better place, by combating terrorism, or purging it of Communism, sometimes stooping to the level of the Communists ourselves.
A similarity that may not be as blatant as the others is the fact that the United States is on the edge of acting like an imperialist nation in its quest against these nations. It seems that this new century we have made ourselves “god” and have decided that we know what is best for everyone on earth. You have all heard the claims that the United States is being the “policeman of the world” and is remaking the world in its own image. I believe that this is hitting the nail on the edge. One of the main goals of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism is that we plan to “inter” democracy in the countries that we have invaded. It’s possible that Iraq was the attempt of getting Vietnam right. We never succeeded in Vietnam, so President Bush seems to think that if we do it in Iraq, all of our sins will be atoned.
However, there are few differences in Iraq and Vietnam, but I believe that in the end they do nothing but show that Iraq is a premature Vietnam in the making. The first case is the fact that at the peak of the Vietnam war, there were nearly 544,000 troops stationed in and around Vietnam. In Iraq, there are only around 140,000 soldiers. I believe that this is the case because in today’s day and age, there is more technology that makes the need for more troops less. Also, Vietnam was made up of dense jungles and swamps. Iraq is largely a barren desert where most of the fighting is done in cities. Both of these situations the United States Army was unprepared for. They were trained to fight the trench style of fighting that was mainly done in WWII and that was simply not the case in Vietnam or Iraq.
One instance that held us back in Vietnam was the fact that the Chinese army would support the Vietcong if our Imperialism got out of hand. However, this is simply not the case in Iraq; our enemies do not have immediate back up if our cruelty approaches Hitler-like levels. I believe that we chose our enemy well this time. If it had been Iran, Hussein would have assisted, even though Iran is a formidable enemy. I believe that we realized our capabilities militarily, and then chose a suitable enemy. In Vietnam, if we would have done this we quite possibly would have won, but we did not have that luxury.
Overall, I believe that it is clear that the War on Terrorism is undeniably similar to The Vietnam War. Even though there a few minor discrepancies, I believe that these will be told out through time. One thing that shows this is the fact that Vietnam was a gradual increase. However Iraq was an all out attack, an immediate response. In this sense we can conclude that Iraq actually may not be at all like Vietnam. In the present day, it would seem that the War on Terrorism is just that, a war against Terrorism. Although I believe that it is a war against a doctrine, a war against those participating in Islamic Jihad. The War on Terrorism may be similar to Vietnam in many respects, but there is one thing that sticks out. It has the potential to follow the same course of Vietnam, but it also has the potential to be much worse than Vietnam. If Vietnam extinguished three million Vietnamese, including women and children, will the War on Terrorism be the next holocaust?