Quote:
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Apr 19 2004, 11:29 AM
Buff ... get real. 
Mike - the invasion of Iraq does not fall into the category of Gulf War I, the invasion of Panama, the multiple invasions of Nicaraqua (the Army had three different Nicaraqua campaign medals in the records before the talk of invasion in the 80s), et al.
The fallacy of the Administration's overall plan is that they regarded it as a "small" war. This is a war similar in scope to Vietnam or Korea, not an invasion of Panama, not an invasion of [insert Central American nation here] in order to secure an apppropriate ROI for United Fruit - not even Gulf War I.
You don't need to limit yourself to America in finding an example of a successful imperialstic war in the 20th century - you're welcome to use another power. Any other power will do.
|
There are countless examples, the English controled most of the world at one time. European powers split most of the world at one time.
The difference and what makes this war unique is that we are trying to improve the situation, not just going in to take what we want.
You change defitions as you see fit, the US lost many more soldiers in the Phillipenes during our occupation that we have in Iraq. If you compare it to the % of soldiers station in country, the death % was much higher back then.
Fortunately this was before the "vietnam experience" so we did not have all the people like you protesting and crying all the time.
Wars, occupation, foreign policy are all dirty things. How many Americans died in a 48 hour period during the Normandy Invasion? How many died during Battle of the Buldge? What about Marines in Guadacanal, Iwo Jima?
I fear it is too late for you and those of your generation who have been scared by Vietnma to grow a backbone....
The experiences in Vietnman have about as much relevency in Iraq as all the wars and battles I mentioned above. Iraq is something new.