-Slim- said:
I know the conditions are very different, etc etc but in essence how do these two conflicts compare?
I wasn't around either, my 2 cents on some similaries and differences.
Gulf of Tokin incident & Saddam's WMD
Vietnam was a two sided war that there were two combatants, God bless America versus the evil Commies, or if you prefer, socialism versus imperialism. Iraq seems like a three or four sided war, more like the conflict in the former Yugosalvia in the 1990's.
The Vietcong had a superpower backing it USSR sending them supplies thru China, the Vietcong could have fougth for a very long time. The factions in Iraq have no superpower backing. However, Iraq was one of the most heavily armed societies in the world under Saddam, there is a limitless supply of small arms widely available, so the guerilla hit & run tactics will also continue for a very long time.
Since there was superpower backing of the North Vietnamese, the United States was hestitant to expand the war north ward into North Vietnam, because of what happened in the Korean war. In Iraq, the United States faces no similar geo-strategic constraint. However, it don't seem to be doing the marines any good so far. This point is mostly for rehtorical propaganda consumption for the American left and right. The right will claim they have a free hand to engage the enemy in Iraq any where any time and with better military will prevail. The American left would say, "Idiot, Bush is allowed to bomb everyone in Iraq with impunity but the country no where near to being stabilized." Rather standard debating positions for both sides at the Rx forum!
In one way it is exactly the same, is that the US military can engage the enemy successfully, but the US military is not in control of the territory. This is very important. A winner controls the territory. When you don't control the territory, the war will continue. In Vietnam, the Tet Offensive showed that the Vietcong could strike any target, even if they get their asses kicked and they did get their asses kicked. Currently I read that today, no road in Iraq is safe, USA does not control a single road in Iraq.
Remember the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, what they did was capture the cities and control the roads, it was a text book invasion and conquest. Right now, the Americans do not even control the roads in Iraq. Looking at it from this angle, the marines wins the street battles but are still not in control of the streets, makes Iraq looks like a bottomless pit of fighting the the Americans, just like what Vietnam turned out to be.
