What is the down to earth reason the great United States is losing the Iraq war like Vietnam?

Bored Now

In my humble and militarily-ignorant opinion, the simple explanation is that people tend to fight much more fiercely against an invader in their own country than against people in another country who seem to not want them to be there. Much as I think you'd see all the antiwar sentiment in the U.S. disappear if we were dealing with the Iraqi army occupying our major cities instead of vice versa.

We ousted some dictators and rattled off accomplishments in Vietnam, too. We talked about the Vietnamese taking over the war effort, too, "Vietnamization". Soldiers came back from Vietnam saying we were winning the war and confused by the liberal media, too; I still remember one of them very angry about this in 1972. Turned out, though, that it was the right-wing propaganda that was wrong, not the media. I don't think the problem is the media as much as the war.

Big Mac

Guerilla warfare.

The US has the most technologically advanced army in the world. But in the battlefield, in an occupation, when the people are predominantly against you and support guerilla-style groups like the insurgency in Iraq and the Vietcong in Vietnam then the pickings look slim.

Plus when the insurgencies are funded by a neighbouring country (China in Vietnam through Cambodia, Iran for Iraq) things get worse.

The US technology unfortunately equates to little against the hit and run (and hide in villages as innocent civilians) tactics of the Iraqi insurgency and Vietcong.

The key to winning this war (not pulling out in disgrace) is to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis, which at the moment looks like a long shot.

ps. I don't think the US are winning like some answers here. The recent battles in Sadr city which *fact* killed over 10 soldiers are proof that the Iraqi insurgency is still out of control of American troops.

Unfortunate, and the insurgency is prolonging the war unjustly - but this is the reality.

The Violator!

There is ONE simple but true answer...

Study British Counter Insurgency operations and you'll see that there is a world of difference between US tactics and UK tactics.

It's called hearts and minds and it is based on ABSOLUTE military discretion... failure to do this drives thousands into the camp of your enemy. When the policy is applied successfully it provides willing locals who provide you with top grade intel so you can VERY specifically target your operations against them.

BUT you don't win a lot of hearts and minds through illegal wars and occupations... you win even less when you are caught treating the local populace to torture methods and you use mortars and missiles against enemy positions in built up areas...

You have to think "what if this was the US"... it will lead to a very different conclusion and the 'liberal' media has nothing to do with it - the key perception that counts is NOT that of the US anyway, but that of normal Iraqis!

Hearts and minds is primarily a POLITICAL weapon - which is why the US has major problems - everyone hates US politicians and they never use subtlety or discretion if they can use a blunt instrument!

vagabond_52773

We are not really losing.

Guerrilla warfare is a desperation tactic of a losing enemy. An enemy resorts to Guerrilla warfare because they cannot win and their only choice is to outlast the national will of their opponent because they know they cannot defeat the military of the opponent.

The problem is that the US does not have the national will to fight. Proof of this is what Ho Chi Mihn and OBL have both said in their speeches. The US does not have the nation will because of several things. 1) We are used to seeing problems solved in a short term fashion with minimal casualties. This is evident in our TV shows where a problem is solved in 30 or 60 minutes. 2) We are bound by rules that prevent us from being able to effectively fight against a insurgent opponent because of our national culture. We have to be the good guy in what we do. One slip up and the nation stereotypes the entire military as being murders, torturers, etc. despite 99.9% of the military doing the right thing. 3) We are fighting an enemy that is not bound by these rules and has the advantage of being able to manipulate our culture as well as the culture of thier own people.

jwthoughts

Um....we're not. If you stop watching the liberal media, and talk to a few our our military men and women from Iraq when they return, you get a whole different picture.

Scott

The US army is used to conventional warfare. Against these two groups who use guerilla warfare and hid in crouds of people it is harder for a country like the US to fight. Even though we kill more enemy soldiers than they kill by a lot. In vietnam the north vietnamese soldiers were scared to death by america and only kept fighting because they knew that pressure back home would force our retreat. Whenever they saw a US jet or helicopter they would run. In Iraq many more terrorists die than American soldiers by dozens of thousands. Plus this isn't necessarily a war anymore. We beat the Iraqi army within a month. Now we are just trying to keep the peace. We are now just occupying the country until it gets back on its feet. Once it does we will withdraw *most* of our soldiers but still have a military base there. Mainly to protect Iraq from the bloodthirsty Iran.

Ryan H.

Because its not a war, and we aren't losing. We are policing people who are complacent and don't see a need to step up and do it Themselves. Oh, and Bush is a dumb a**

rug

The liberal media is making the deaths more personal. If you go by the deaths in other wars we are losing less people. The main reason we lost in Vietnam was that the Democrat controlled senate, congress and executive branches failed to fund the troop properly and if Hillary or Obama get we have the same thing happen.

Sniper_Zeus

Yup. What that first guy said. We're not losing.

The media is notoriously anti-war, which stimulates in the minds of the enemy the concept that we could lose. Members of the military know that we can accomplish our goals in Iraq if given enough time. The only defeat that could be handed to the U.S. in Iraq would be the one we hand ourselves, if a President withdraws our troops. If our troops remain on the ground, we will remain undefeated. Nobody will stand and fight us. They're just waiting for us to go away. And I'm seriously worried that the anti-war politicking is going to yield results before we finish the job.

Its easy to say you're against the war. Nobody likes war. So its easy to gain support by bashing it. That is the largest damage we can do to our troops. We're certainly not dying in the volumes we were in Vietnam. Its a very different war with a very different consequence for premature withdrawl.

I ask any anti-war ninny to stop and think. What will the situation be on the ground in Iraq in a year if we withdraw now? Or two years from now? Four?

Its simple. It would be a proxy state for Iran, a training ground for terrorists, and a launching point to firebomb Israel.

Or...

We can stay and prevent that, and eventually, when the region is more secure, our troops can come home. Bringing them home now is the ONLY reason we would face defeat.

Liz

were not not losing. and stop watching Liberia Media,

richard t

It is their government, not ours,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they don't want our government(obviously).They are a tribal society.................And denocracy is an experiment just like all other forms of govenment........
Didn't work in Vietnam.they didn't want our form of government either...............

Wayne G

it isn't. if you look beyond the lies being perpetrated by the liberal media, you'll discover that we not only defeated and ousted a brutal dictator, after giving him over ten years to comply with the surrender terms of the first Gulf War, but we helped institute a new government, new constitution and are rebuilding the infrastructure of its major cities, including hospitals and learning institutions. it's a tremendous feat of accomplishments if you chose to search out the truth, you would know that.

Coolnickname.

Sigh,stop watching Democracy Now and talk to soldiers and you'll know we're winning.

Inadequate troop levels
Insufficient post-invasion plans
cost of the war in Iraq to U.S. taxpayers
Failed to destroy OPEC cartel (sell off Iraq oil fields)

Economically the US can not sustain the cost. We are running the national debt into the stratosphere to fund Bush's war. If China pulls out their investments in US securities, our country will be bankrupt.

There are just as many ways to win a war as there are to lose one. Economically, Iraq is winning is the war. Additionally, so are the terrorist.

roUK

The media wanted it to be Vietnam all over again. Before a single shot was fired the liberal media was calling it the next Vietnam. You cannot trust a word they write.

trigunkilla

all is fair in love and war. there are no rules. and this is no longer a war. there will be no winning or losing here. the only way to know who will win is when its all over.

nootch g

because were not really fighting an opponent. its a guerilla war waged against coward terrorists who cannot fight fairly. the US is still a great military power

seanmicheals122

Same old Story,The public are divided about the war.Because of Power,idiots politicitians are using the war to score points with the voters.Im sure,if the American people are backing their sons and daughters in the war zone,RIGHT OR WRONG to be there,then everything will be successful.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: