Go to Personal Poetry
- Add a comment
- Go to My position on the Iraqi war and peace
Re: Iraq and George W. Bush, Vietnam and LBJ
Vietnam brings up some interesting points vis-a-vis peacekeeping missions, which is what Iraq has been since 2003 and which Vietnam was fundamentally. The same problems of the US being the lightening rod for domestic opposition to the South Vietnamese government apply to the Iraqi government. Shadowy support for the Viet Cong came from China, while support for attacks on American troops in Iraq comes from Syria and from groups in Saudi Arabia, with probably some from Iran. The main difference is that the goal in Vietnam was to protect the South Vietnamese government, with forays into the North or bombings in Cambodia having to be justified before the American people as necessary for that primary goal, the war effort in support of the peace effort, while in Iraq the goal was deposing Saddam Hussein and our lingering peace efforts were justified as necessary for preventing Hussein from returning to power and then from the Ba'ath party returning to power with some sort of Saddam II, the peace effort in support of the war effort.
Another point of comparison is in the media's role of calling into question the war effort in Vietnam vs. Soros' deliberate and effective mislabeling of the peace effort as "war". In the first, the US was prevented from redirecting its military towards the overthrowing of Mao and was confined to a sitting-duck defensive posture of propping up South Vietnam . In the second, Soros continues to gain political power by making victory in peacekeeping necessary for maintaining US reputation, despite the clear victory in the war effort in 2003.
I am sure that George Soros knows that peacekeeping is a militarily disastrous undertaking. That is why I am disgusted with him and MoveOn.org, and why I will not support Barrack Obama until he condemns and repudiates Soros and that whole cynical operation. As for McCain, his position could be similar to Nixon's as far as ending the peacekeeping, hopefully before starting anything else.
posted by
cpklapper
on June 13, 2008 at 7:54 AM
| link to this | reply
Before George W. Bush the US deployed troops into short Middle East operations such as the Gulf War. In his 2000 presidential campaign, George W. aimed at China. Throughout history China only looked after its own interests as far as concerns a war against us. Then 9/11 happened, and the Bush Administration applied the president's aggressive position on foreign policy on Saddam Hussein and Iraq. On the election chessboard in 2008 if John McCain plays the Barry Goldwater position and Barrack Obama's the peace candidate hope that the winner plays, ending the game in Iraq. Similarly to the position of Barrack Obama on universal healthcare, Lyndon B. Johnson offered and succeeded in the domestic social reforms of
The Great Society. And similarly to George W. he escalated the Vietnam War. Thus the Iraq War appears the alpha and the omega.
posted by
BC-A
on June 13, 2008 at 5:49 AM
| link to this | reply
excellent point my dear...though my hands are off on politics...
posted by
__Purple_Mermaid11__
on June 13, 2008 at 4:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Your correct I had forgotten who started this war.......
And now I can't decide who is to blame for our lack of Peace. 
Great post, Carl!
Solita
posted by
mothernature
on June 13, 2008 at 1:32 AM
| link to this | reply
Passionate discourse Carl, eloquent and fiery, point well taken. Bravo!
posted by
Sinome
on June 12, 2008 at 8:53 PM
| link to this | reply