Is Iraq another Vietnam?

I read about people who are making comparisons between that little incident we were involved with in Southeast Asia and our current snafu in Iraq. While I can understand why they might choose to mention both in the same breath, I have to take exception to their homology. Some will be quick to point out that both started with lies . . . although that would not be exactly correct. True, the Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam was a manifestation of rubbery verisimilitude and the American people were initially told tall tales using weapons of mass distraction about Saddam Hussein and Iraq, But we were in South Vietnam at the behest of the government. The only dealings we had with Iraq was our successful mission of containment.

Even though there was never a confirmed sighting of attacks on the USS Maddox or the USS C. Turner Joy inside the Gulf of Tonkin, LBJ decided it was time to go to war with North Vietnam, even going so far as to turn down an opportunity for peace talks with the North as early as fall 1964. Of course, when it comes to Iraq, we didn't have a chance at peace talks, only an opportunity for weapons inspectors to complete their jobs. But GWB decided it would be in the best interest of the United States to forego any formalities like proof and get involved in another foreign war. You can't really blame the guy, Afghanistan wasn't really the challenge he was hoping for and if you want to be known as a "War President", you need a conflict that's going to produce a substantial amount of casualties on both sides. After all, you can declare a war on terror, but unless you create a physical location for terror, it's tough to get funding.

The US was involved in Vietnam for more years than many would believe. We actually sent our first shipload of arms to the Pro=French Vietnamese on Aug. 10, 1950, just five short years after the end of World War II. I guess Korea wasn't enough of a burden. So when we finally left Vietnam on April 29, 1975 . . . nearly twenty-five years from our initial involvement. We didn't start arming Iraq until 1983 when Donald Rumsfeld met with Saddam Hussein at the behest of Ronald Reagan to help aid Iraq in their skirmish with Iran. As you can plainly see, we've another three years to match our involvement in Southeast Asia.

To be fair, we were only in actual full combat with North Vietnam from January 1965 to January 1973, a total of eight years. If you discount the first Gulf War, the Iraq war began in March 2003 and we would have to continue until March 2011 to match the time spent in Vietnam. Unlikely . . . I hope.

Although any death due to war is tragic, so far the casualties in Iraq have been far behind what they were in previous wars:

As you can see, as tragic a situation as Bush's war is, it is an unfair slap in the face to Vietnam veterans to compare this war with Vietnam. Our Vietnam vets were treated horribly by Americans when they returned home. There were no yellow ribbons or TLC television shows waiting for them, only disdain for something they didn't even volunteer for.

Yes, Iraq is not a good place to be. Yes, we ended up there under shaky if not totally false pretenses. Yes, this is another example of how man can be more vicious than any wild animal on the face of the Earth. Yes, this war (or more precisely, this President) has divided our nation like no war since Vietnam, but no matter how many comparisons one makes, this is not another Vietnam. Except this . . . Vietnam was supposed to be a lesson for us to draw from. Did we learn anything? Apparently not. Perhaps Iraq will be a better lesson.