This provocative piece (linked by the inimitable Laura Rozen) does a great job of both critiquing some of the Iraq-Vietnam comparisons and outlining what analogies can appropriately be drawn. Essentially, it proposes that Iraq is kind of like Vietnam in reverse:
In Vietnam, the United States entered a divided country with a simmering civil war and left behind a nasty tyranny. In Iraq, the US has unseated a nasty tyranny but may leave behind a simmering civil war that could lead to a divided country. In Vietnam, fearing a nuclear clash with the Soviet Union or a confrontation with China, the US slid in slowly: first sending technical advisers, then undertaking search and destroy missions, and ultimately engaging in a full-throttle war. In Iraq, the US began full throttle, switched to search and destroy, and is now seriously debating whether to begin sliding out.
Even if Vietnam and Iraq diverge in their respective details, however, some parallels and applicable lessons remain. George Kennan, a foreign policy titan who remains largely unknown to non-polisci majors, weighed in on Vietnam during Senate hearings convened by Senator Fulbright in 1966. By that time, Kennan, Fulbright, and others could see the worrisome future of our Vietnam policy, and the worries then largely reflect the majority (and growing) public sentiment on Iraq.
"[T]here is more respect to be won in the opinion of this world by a resolute and courageous liquidation of unsound positions than by the most stubborn pursuit of extravagant and unpromising objectives," [Kennan] said. Kennan, were he alive today, would have little patience for the Bush administration's frequent call to stay in Iraq because a commitment was made and so many soldiers have already died. Just because the US had shot itself in one foot, he told the Senate committee, didn't mean it should fire away at the other.
Foreign policy requires constant adjustment and reevaluation, especially during wartime. The Bush administration -- and much of the Department of Defense -- has been stuck in 2003 for three years. It's time (and has been for a while) to reassess and improve our policies and tactics. It's time to change the course.
