In any analogy we have to look at what is analoguous. We have to analyze -- take apart -- the whole to discern its character, compare it with other phenomena, and then put the thing back together again.

So, the analogy to Vietnam is a starting point. To procede deeper than the 58000 versus 3000 dead we'd have to look at numbers of wounded and survival rates in the two wars -- i.e. how many kids are being saved today versus 35 years ago. Then we'd have to look at numbers deployed , 500,000 I believe at the height of Vietnam versus 150-200,000 in Iraq. Then we'd look at duration of the Vietnam war and the analoguous point we find ourselves at.

This last is difficult, as we went in like a lion to Iraq (so to speak), while in Vietnam the situation was reversed. However I do see the same pattern of events. The call for a 'surge' , more troops, once we find ourselves in difficulty. The labelling of those wanting to exit as 'defeatists' who want to 'cut and run' , this seems have an earlier echo in Vietnam era discourse.
southcounty | 01.01.07 - 12:26 pm | #