Iraq's not Vietnam;

[Theophylact]

it's worse, according to Chris Patten, the European Union's external relations commissioner (and former Tory Governor of Hong Kong).

"The comparison... that Iraq could become as difficult an issue as Vietnam is misplaced, because I think it is arguably much more serious," Chris Patten told a news conference after an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Ireland.

"If things go wrong in Iraq we will be living with the consequences for a very, very long time," he added.

[chipbgt]

and I dont think its as bad as vietnam, so me and him cancel each other out.

[pickel]

The only difference is that the enemy wears rags on their heads and masks to cover their cowardly faces .

[elmers]

edit: Actually Ive decided not to post in Iraq/America and Bush/Kerry threads.

[capybara]

Originally posted by elmers
edit: Actually Ive decided not to post in Iraq/America and Bush/Kerry threads.

me too!
oops, nevermind!

[Atomic Rooster]

Holy smokes!! You mean to tell me that Iraq is NOT Viet Nam? Well, shiver me timbers.

[originel]

Well he's certainly entitled to his opinion, but i disagree heavily. It would have been nice if he had gone into some of his reasoning, but i can guess some of his thoughts.

At the time in vietnam the theory of containment was ruling our government, and at the time the government felt that if we didn't act in vietnam then the consequences would be grave. as it turns out that wasn't really the case since we pulled out in the end. it's basically the same as Iraq (although inverted).

Yes it could cause more destabilization in the region, but i think that the stability we have caused will basically neutralize with the instability after a decade or two.

and besides, i don't think that argument directly affects us, just those in the middle east. As for the effects on us they are significantly less.
800 is a lot better than 47,000 casualties.

[Chuckiechan]

I think the Democrats wish it were Vietnam. They are up to their neck in denial about Iraq. Kerry is even groping for a center position.

The bright headlight of defeat is heading straight for Kerry. The best thing that can happen as far as Kerry is concerned is for Iraq to go peacefully into the proposed new government and be successful. He's changing his tune to hopefully take away some of the hope of the insurgents that if he wins, they win. Smart play on his part.

Bush has to win the peace in Iraq, to allow Kerry to go to the economy and jobs before it is too late and everyone is working and the economy is booming. They don't have the votes in the house and senate to derail the economy anymore so they have to move quickly.

We will only have a Vietnam if Kerry wins, since wars run badly are a Democratic specialty.

Remember, Kerry or Bush we still have North Korea to deal with, plus nukes in Iran.

[Mike]

Originally posted by Chuckiechan
Remember, Kerry or Bush we still have North Korea to deal with, plus nukes in Iran.

So, what are you suggesting? North Korea and Iran should be next?

[MegalosSkylaki]

No offense, Theophylact,
But could we get a little more of your own enlightening words,
And less Linkeys from others?


DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOG