Three problems we had in Vietnam, were: 1: the high body count on our side, 2: the corrupt unstable government we were there to shore up, 3: not going in for the kill in the North.
1. We did get the body count right this time around. Even if you add in the injured troops, the count was much lower than in Vietnam.
2. In Iraq (and probably not Afghanistan) we set up a reasoned government and held free elections. The government was rather stable. I believe it needed more time to stabilize and move forward. Afghanistan is still problematic, and I’m not happy about the rules of engagement. It seems to me we need to be more assertive with the Afghanistan government. If we aren’t, the prognosis for long term stability is reduced significantly.
3. As for the third problem, I believe we have allowed Iran to game the system for political and military gain. We should have warned them early on. Then we should have taken punitive measures if it wouldn’t stay out. Training, arming, and sending in terrorists, should have garnered Iran some heavy penalties.
I am sensitive to your reference to the U. N. and globalist concessions we make in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. As it applies to Iran, I have a problem with it there too.
In Iraq, I think we did a rather admirable job. There were factional problems there. We kept the Sunnis and Shiites fairly well balanced. We kept the Kurds fairly satisfied.
I was not impressed with the inclusion of women in government, or their inclusion in the vote. It’s not that I have a problem with women voting, but Iraq was not the U. S., and it really wasn’t any of our business who voted there.
As for the U. N. and globalist demands, I’d tell them to go blank themselves if they even opened their yaps. I agree with you there.
I think Iraq was a noble ambition.
We could have divided the middle east with freedom, from Turkey to the Persian gulf.
We basically had it done until Obama gave it away
The War On Terrorism as its played out in Iraq and Afghanistan looks to me like a higher tech and lower casualty version of Vietnam.
We did not and have not gone after Iran or Pakistan, which were the equivalent of Haiphong Harbor in Vietnam, the lifeline of support for killing and injuring our forces on the battlefield.
If you remember the history, the Haiphong Harbor was off limits to bombing out of fear of Russian sailors being killed and creating the possibility of a “wider war” with the potential for a “nuclear conflict.”
The same old thinking about Nam I suspect plays into what Bush and Obama have chosen not to do with Iran or Pakistan in the last ten years.