Instapundit links to a blog that notes that yes indeed we could win in Iraq on the ground and lose at home--basically what we did in Vietnam.
There are big differences making a direct comparison tough:
- Our military knows how we lost in Vietnam and hopefully is correcting for this fatal flaw by preparing the Iraqis to fight without our full support.
- This is such a vital region that if Iran tried to invade Iraq, we'd have to respond, thus ruling out losing the Vietnam way.
- Iraq has oil so doesn't require our miltiary aid just to buy the weapons to survive. If Iraq just has to face internal threats because Iran won't risk a fight with us, Iraq can beat them even if they do it more brutally than we would.
- We are hardly the only source of weapons and assistance. I doubt France would lose a chance to make a buck here selling French weapons. Private security firms can also be hired to carry out functions we would if Congress forbids certain aid. So Iraq will have the weapons and support that South Vietnam could not buy.
- And with the web, we might have the first real example of Americans carrying out their own foreign policy to support Iraq via the web if our government won't fight for us, and lobbying the government to stay involved as much as possible.
Money, guns, and lawyers. What else do you need if the sh*t hits the fan?
