This is mainly for those alive during the Vietnam War. Are these two wars really as similiar as they are commonly made out to be. I would agree with those on the left that our current war is looking more and more like it was the wrong war. Despite that, I really get sick of those on the left comparing it to Vietnam. Now I wasn't alive then and am not much of a Vietnam War history buff, so if I provide any inaccuracies in my argument I apologize in advance.

Didn't the Vietnam War involve a draft? I think there is a huge difference between sending kids against their will to die in a foreign country compared to kids volunarily signing up to join the armed forces and going to another country to fight a war. The troops in Iraq right now are performing the greatest service I can imagine, but it is something they wanted to do. I can remember back 6-8 years ago when I was in high school and the recruiters would come visit and give his little one weekend a month, 2 weeks a year speech and everyone just kinda smiled and said thanks, but no thanks. That $40,000 is a hell of a bargain during peacetime, but in a time of war, it doesn't look so nice in your bank account when you're overseas getting shot at. Despite my attitude toward joining the military there are many young men and women my age who absolutely were ecstatic to join the armed forces, which is a wonderful career, just not one that would ever interest me personally. The reason I bring this up is because these people signed up to join the service because it was the life they wanted to lead. So I don't think it's fair for some punk rocker to say they're being sent to their deaths against their wishes. I think by saying things like this, it is really an insult to the troops by completely ignoring the personal commitment they made just so the group can sell records or make some sort of political statement. This isn't Vietnam where young people were plucked from college or their careers to fight whether they wanted to or not. If it were, they wouldn't be sitting in their garage writing songs about the war, they would be over in Iraq themselves fighting. Fighting is the career these brave men and women have chosen. The only person I know who is overseas is my cousin and this is the attitude he conveys to my family. He wishes he wasn't there, but he certainly doesn't feel abused by his government because he made a commitment and he has every intention of fulfilling it.

That (the draft) may be one of the few differences between Iraq and Vietnam. Our nation was split in half during Vietnam, just as it is now. People are growing sicker and sicker of hearing about our kids dying for oil each day. The death toll is now over 1,900 in Iraq. Such a shame that we got young kid's dying in an old man's war.

Oh well. What do I know? I'm just a teenager who isn't even old enough to vote.

A good reason why there hasn't been a draft is because of the President called for one, there wouldn't be much support for it. Besides, with how the war is going and how Bush's popularity is right now, this would backfire horribly for the administration.

Then again, thats what you get if you don't get enough ground troops in the first place and basically hope that once the war is over, the region becomes a Glorius Land of Milk and Chocolate, with Children running around in glee and fairies flying to the sky...

If anything, I blame the government's general approach from the White House to the "experts" at the CIA and Pentagon that was based on mostly assumptions concluded from logical guesses. Notice that I don't just blame the President, for that would be too easy, like blaming several administrations for everything in Vietnam. I blame the establishment for wanting a war desperately enough that they finally got it, but at what cost?

Could we have won Iraq? For sure! If we not bungled up Iraq so badly, everyone would have forgotten the f*ck-ups by the government and remembered only by historians decades later. For really, who cares about mistakes when you win a war? But now, The question of victory in general is up in the air. Very unfortunate....

The greatest difference between the two conflicts is our support of the troops. During Vietnam, our civilians spat at the troops and everything else. Most of the troops were forced to go (which makes spitting at them very stupid). Now, we support our troops (as we should) and anyone who doesn't is basically a traitor. Good! It's just kind of funny (in a strange sense, not humorous) that now, we support our troops more than ever, and they choose to enlist. I don't know. It's a good thing our civilians know how to treat our troops.

I agree with that Tony Love.

Thanks, Ronnie.

Please tell me how this War is for oil.

The opposition to the war in Vietnam was a by product of the draft, and this was precisely because the draft was on a lottery system, and middle and upper class kids were being selected and being sent to Vietnam. The "volunteer" army we have today is largely comprised of people from lower socio-economic groups and minorities, and thus there is not the hew and cry from people in power as there was in Vietnam. I believe that only a handful of people in congress have their children in the military, and I dont think anyone in the executive branch does.

The primary similarity on the ground is that in both cases we went in without a real plan other than to win the hearts and minds of a people we did not really understand. In Vietnam we were intervening in a civil war, and in Iraq we are causing a civil war. In both cases we are seen by the majority of the locals as an army of occupation, not as an army of liberation. Like the misadventure in Vietnam, we are going to suffer the same fate in Iraq.

For this and for many many other reasons I believe George Bush will go down in history as one of the worst five presidents in the history of this country.

Don T, you don't have it exactly right here regarding the draft, and while the draft was a factor in the opposition to the war, it was far from the only one.

I can't give you the exact dates off hand, and I'm too lazy to look them up, but I'm certain that the lottery sytem was not implemented until the last two years or so of the war.

Prior to that, there were student deferments. Kids who were in college -- kids from the middle and upper classes -- were not drafted, so the burden fell mostly on the minorities and the kids from the lower socio-economic groups.

There was plenty of opposition to the war long before the lottery system started drafting kids from the middle and upper classes.

A lot of that opposition was centered around the fact that it had become a "class war" of sorts; not that middle and upper class kids were dying, but that it was the kids from the lower classes, which, as you can imagine, was an argument which was quite dear to those on the left side of the political spectrum.

As far as what JB posted goes.....

Here's the thing about an all volunteer army as I see it, at least in this case.

Military service provides a very viable career option for those without very many other choices. Unfortunately, though, very much like the first several years of the war in Viet Nam, those who elect the military as an option (or who were drafted back then - and there were volunteers as well) are those from the lower socio-economic groups, so once again the burden of the fighting and the dying is falling on them.

Also, I would venture to say that many of those who chose a military career, while realizing the possibility that they may someday be called upon to fight and would have no problem fighting to protect clear American interests (like going into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, or directly protecting the country against a clear foreign agressor or enemy), would not have joined the military had they known there would be a certainty that they would be called upon to risk their lives in Iraq in a war with objectives that are unclear to them.

Just my opinion there, of course.

I would also mention that a lot of the burden of fighting has fallen on members of the National Guard, who also would not object to fighting in the circumstances described above, but whose motivation in joining the National Guard originally was more to protect their country within its borders on occasions when local police were inadequate (like the race riots in the south during the 60's), or during a national crisis or disaster.

Again, just my opinion. I haven't surveyed any members of the military, and since I'm somewhat of an old man, I don't have any friends in the military, either.

As far as other similarities between the two wars are concerned, aside from the draft there are several significant ones, as well as several significant differences.

I think it's fair to compare the two, however, because both wars involved sending troops to foreign countries with whom we were not at war, and unlike WW II, which the entire country was behind after Pearl Harbor, neither the War in Viet Nam or the war in Iraq seems to have very much popular support, and public support of the Iraqi war seems to be diminishing daily as the death toll rises, which is exactly what happened with the war in Viet Nam.

Yes Pat, we all are getting sick of our kids dying over there everyday. It's always a disgrace when young men and woman are killed in a war. But your "for Oil" comment is a weak one. If anything the last year or so has proven that we did not go over there for oil. Gasoline prices and home heating prices keep going higher and higher. And they were heading in that direction even before Katrina. That hurricane just made it even worse. So if we went in there for oil, then why are we paying so much for these oil products? A word of advice; if you plan on being a journalist/reporter, then please do some research and get your facts straight before you shoot from the hip.

But then again, you're not even old enough to vote yet.


Don Cardi

If memory serves correctly the first year of the lottery was late in 1969. (I had a relatively high number).

The first lottery was held on December 1, 1969, roughly the halfway point of American involvement.

This really is not an answer to the question posed, but I was alive during the way, albeit pretty young. However, I had two brothers who were eligible for the draft. Both were exempt while they were in college. When my oldest brother graduated, he took a job teaching in Fort Apache in the Bronx to keep his exempt status, as it was considered an underpriviliged area.

My father was in the Navy during WWII and my parents, first generation Americans, were deeply ingrained in patriotism to this country. My grandparents settled in the Bronx when they came from Italy, and we lived only a few miles from that spot. My parents had never traveled much, and were quite content in their niche, being cautious and conservative, as were most children of the Depression era.

However, I remember an episode while my brother was in college. He had forgotten to footnote a quote in a term paper, and was accused of plaigarism. They threatened to throw him out of school, and he would lose his draaft-exempt status. I remember my mother telling my father if that happened, we would have to move to Cananda, because she would never let her son go to Viet Nam.

I think that this illustrates the vehement opposition to that war. Here, my parents were willing to leave everything behind rather than let my brother go to war. Given that they had no inkling that US citizens would one day be given amnesty for such a move, my parents, who had never ventured outside of their little world, were still willing to do so.

I ask a question....

Does anyone here at BB.Net really think the government will install a draft for this war?

Unless this country is under direct attack by an identifiable foreign power - like if North Korea or Iran develop a long range delivery system to go along with nuclear weapons that they supposedly have, and use them - then I don't think that we'll see the draft again.

Certainly at this time it would be political suicide.

Plaw, the lottery began in 1969. I remember it well cause I was number one. To clarify my point, I agree there was certainly significant oppositioin ot the Vietnam war before the draft lottery, and certainly it had become a big deal by late 1967-68. I think the tipping point was when the middle class turned against the war, which was about a year into the Nixon administration.

Iraq v. Viet Nam, a point of comparison.

If I remember correctly from my Viet Nam era days, the theme or mission of the US was to stop the spread of communism - the domino theory. Communism was going to topple every democratic government in the world like dominoes. That theory was born out of the cold war of the 50s. Viet Nam eventually succumbed, but the dominoes didn't fall too far.

What is Iraq's theme or mission? In not so many words, to stop the spread of terrorism. Different circumstances, but similar effort. Will the outcome be the same?

note on the Draft of 1969. I was a 20 year old junior at SUNY Oswego. My draft lottery number was 348. They were taking 19 year olds up to # 150. I dropped out of college figuring I'd never get drafted. I didn't.

In many perspectives, yes. As others have already said, the general dissent over the war is an obvious similarity. Also, the use of guerrila and terrorist tactics is another. Yet another is the US goal, to establish a democratic, pro-US state.

If you really want more similarities, I suggest you do some reasearch into the 1898 US-Philippine War, waged by President McKinley, which is also very similar, with an all-volunteer force. However, the US managed to win that war (lasting from 1898 to 1902) by turning the tide on the guerrilas...they took the civilians from villages and relocated them to captured territory (often in "reconcentration camps"), spread out across the entire landscape, and used small, tighly knit units to eventually drive back and capture their leader, Emilio Aguinaldo.

Public sentiment was very much against this war when it was learned of the massive number of casualties that arose from the conflict (in comparison to rebelling the Spaniards when we liberated Cuba). It also forced future presidents like TR to boost and update the military forces of the United States.

You were fine until you mentioned oil, which is an excuse you personally seem to love to use, but never actually explain.

Please enlighten all of us how the war is for oil, and, if so, what benefits we are/will be receiving from this oil?

I'm not trying to be hypercritical or sarcastic, but I'd like you to outline what some of the "bungles" are, in your opinion.

Couple that with the intelligencia losing out on grants and research funds that were diverted to paying for the war, which created a culture of dissent through disgrunted educators, reporters, etc.

I disagree. There was a plan in place for Iraq (it took 18 months to formulate) but it is clear that they "misunderestimated" the enemy, and the strength of the insurgency.

Also, the aid pouring in to help the insurgency's cause from rogue states or other indivuduals/groups is similar to the support that the Vietcong received from countries like China.

Just wondering, who would the other four be?

Agreed.

Mmm, yes, it seems to be this way in almost every instance in recent memory.

Before, it was the national militia having to do the dirty work.

Another similarity is the antiwar portrayal from most of the media. Much like in Vietnam, where reports were oftentimes manufactured or exaggerated (for instance - the famous footage of Brian Jennings I believe in front of a crashed US plane in flames was recycled dozens of times for different reports, albeit without Jennings in frame), such as when the media reported the "debacle" at the US embassy and the Tet Offensive, when, in reality, the enemy didn't get past the first two guards inside the building. Or how the media covered the My Lai massacre relentlessly, but never mentioned the Hue Massacre of Vietcong on Vietnamese and US troops.

Cheers.

I defer to Plaw's answer.

A lot of good input here. I agree with all the similarities mentioned here, I think that as more and more opposition grows to this war, the feeling and atmosphere of why we're there, and will we ever win, is the same exact sentiment we all had during Viet Nam.

SB, SC PLaw, I too remember the draft lottery. My older brother was in college(fortunately) and my younger brother was just a kid. However, my eventual husband was only 18 when he volunteered the draft. All his buddies were getting called, and he knew it was only a matter of time and wanted to get it over with. Boy, his parents could have killed him for volunteering. They were scared to death for him. After spending 10 mos in Greece and about a year in Nam, he was out just after his 21st birthday.

As far as the national guard goes, PLaw is right, no one who joined the guard then would worry much about going to Viet Nam (Bush). I wonder how many in today's guard ever thought they'd be sent to war?


TIS

Right, because you know, being a National Guard pilot is nothing in comparison to going to study at Oxford as far as service to ones country... :rolleyes:

Something else I just thought of, which, I believe, proves my point above:

Isn't recruitment way down and below the armed forces quotas or expectations (or whatever terminolgy they use) since the war in Iraq began?

Good question PLaw. I keep hearing it's possible, yet we are assured there won't be a draft.

About 2 mos ago I heard a commentary that after about 4/5 more months, the military will be having a dilemma due to lack of troops if they keep missing their recruitment goals. I haven't heard numbers in recent months.

I wonder too, if the troops they called back to help with Katrina and I assume Rita, are making a significant dent in our men in Iraq or not.

Anyway, this article is from Jan. 05. It's older but gives a little insight.

TIS

web page

If I recall, I remember when they were talking about Hurrican Katrina and troop deployment, the USA still has about 60%+ troops still available if necessary.

But yes, the recruiting trend has been on a decline, for obvious reasons.