The only analogy of Iraq to Vietnam that works is the one the Democrats are bent on creating, turning a win into a defeat, precipitously withdrawing causing untold harm to those who have relied on us and shame to our country and soldiers.
I sometimes think the whole concept of "exit strategy," born in Vietnam, should be deep sixed. What was the exit strategy in WW2? The term implies inability to succeed or complete the job.
The only acceptable "exit strategy" is leaving after we win.
If by exit strategy, you mean the point at which there is stability and troop levels have been drawn down to garrison strength, then you are talking about something that we should be able to accomplish within 2 to 5 years. That's not an "exit" per se, but liberals are trying to get us to commit to an exit. It's an argument that starts from a false premise.
Bush better start splainin some of this stuff.
Amen to that, brother! We are in a decades-long conflict with a malignant force set loose in the world. There is no "exit strategy" from this conflict. "Exit" is another word for surrender and, eventually, dhimmitude and slavery under islamic rule. Christopher Hitchen's new article, "Nowhere to Go" makes this exact point. As he says, "Withdraw to where, exactly?".