Bush: Iraq as Johnson: Vietnam

I’m sure that you have read it countless times over the past two years; Iraq is George W. Bush’s Vietnam. The actual “war” itself does not compare to the catastrophe that Vietnam was to a generation of Americans. But the political context of the comparison reigns true. Who supports the war? I mean more 70% of the American public disagrees with “King George’s War.” Yet, the president continues to defy those who put him in office. It is no secret that President Bush is paranoid about receiving a negative legendary status similar to that of President Lyndon B. Johnson, the war lord of the 60’s.

Johnson presided over a war similar to our current situation in Iraq. Johnson stuck his vain nose into a fire ant nest in which there was no way out. From 1959 to 1975, over 58,000 Americans lost their lives in the jungles of Vietnam. It was the first time in our nation’s history that our armed forces had to deal with a new style of warfare, that of guerilla warfare. Any traditional sense of warfare that had pervaded the upper echelons of the armed forces was thrown to the wind in favor of fighting a war “from the seat of our pants.” This is what is happening in Iraq today in a variety of ways that surpasses Vietnam.

The Bush Administration tells us that we are there to fight terror; to stop those who blew up the World Trade Towers from ever doing a heinous act like that again. But to many observers it seems as if we have exacerbated the situation even more so than before. Yes, we overthrew a horrible man by the name of Saddam Hussein, but at a cost that has yet to be determined. Our troops now find themselves not in the middle of fighting terror, but instead in between sectarian violence; a civil war. With Hussein and his regime out of power, it was simple a matter of time before someone started to vie for power.

As with the case of Vietnam, we have installed a “puppet government” in Iraq. The South Vietnamese government located in Saigon was less organized and even more powerless than the mafia. It is obvious that the “government” in Iraq is rather similar, if not worse. They have no real power; they do not control the country. Those who control the country generally have control of the hearts and minds of a public, this government does not. Instead, a majority of those in Iraq are more concerned with fighting for the Kurds, Shiites, and the Sunnis; factions that have been in place for over a millennia.

If “King George” is simple minded enough as LBJ to believe that American might and firepower can change centuries upon century’s worth of discontent, then we have truly elected a tyrant. History tells us that tyrants are not stupid people, but are vain and naïve; George Bush and those advising him fit this stereotype to the “t.” Vietnam went down as the biggest military debacle in out nation’s history; we left and the North Vietnamese stormed the south five minutes later. Richard Nixon had to clean up what LBJ did and I have a feeling that our next president, whomever that may be, will have to clean up “King George’s debacle” at the cost of this nation’s reputation.

I’m afraid that George W. Bush may very well be correct in his comparison with LBJ. The question is now, who destroyed America’s image and worldly spirit more? You decide.