Beating the Vietnam Analogy to Death

How quickly could the networks post that President Bush accepts the Vietnam comparison in relation to Iraq? Not fast enough, as the leftists in the US have been screaming Iraq=Vietnam ever since 2003.

The problem is that President Bush is making a different comparison than the ones that the Leftists would like you to believe. From his interview on ABC News:

The president said that the insurgents are trying to create a Tet as Tom Friedman said: "He could be right. There's certainly a stepped-up level of violence, and we're heading into an election.

"George, my gut tells me that they have all along been trying to inflict enough damage that we'd leave. And the leaders of al Qaeda have made that very clear. Look, here's how I view it.

"First of all, al Qaeda is still very active in Iraq. They are dangerous. They are lethal. They are trying to not only kill American troops, but they're trying to foment sectarian violence. They believe that if they can create enough chaos, the American people will grow sick and tired of the Iraqi effort and will cause government to withdraw."

The terrorists and their leadership are no dummies. They know that the media reports from Iraq can sway public opinion. If they inflict sufficient body counts on US and coalition forces, they believe that the public will tuck tail and run. They've seen it happen in Afghanistan as French forces have departed their NATO allies, so they figure it's only a matter of time before US forces are withdrawn by Democrats who have been carping for a withdrawal as quickly as possible.

Never mind that the withdrawal is precisely the kind of thing that al Qaeda and the insurgents want. Never mind that withdrawal provides the insurgents and terrorists with the fertile ground from which to launch future operations. Never mind all that. For the Democrats, they see this as a political issue with which they can regain political control and hammer away at the GOP. Sorry, but the problem is that the US needs to hammer away at the insurgents and terrorists, not at each other.

Democrats like to think that they have a better solution for Iraq and dealing with the war on terror. Sorry, but pulling out of Iraq is not a better solution. It disregards history - recent history at that. Somalia. US forces were inserted with a mission to go after a warlord. Those forces came under attack and 53 Rangers were killed in the Black Hawk Down incident. They were not given sufficient backup and even though the US forces decimated their foes, they were withdrawn shortly after the incident. Osama took note. Jihadis around the world took note. And they looked to what happened in Somalia as only a continuation of what happened years before in Beirut under Reagan, who did not act vigorously enough to go after Hizbullah who decimated the Marine Barracks killing 243. And before that, the US Embassy takeover in Tehran in 1979. And before that, the withdrawal of US forces from, and then US support for South Vietnam.

Each of those incidents showed that even though US forces enjoyed tactical and strategic advantages over their foes, the reluctance to use that force led to failures that hamstrung governments going forward. It led to a weaker tactical and strategic posture, and emboldened terrorists and enemies of the US into thinking that the US would endure larger and larger terror attacks without the fear of repercussions.

Going after Afghan's Taliban regime and dealing with Iraq in 2003 only started to disabuse the jihadis and enemies of the US of that notion. However, the ongoing struggles in Iraq are showing that US resolve is not unlimited and that despite knowing that such fighting is a long struggle involving multiple countries and differing strategies, the resolve is being weakened to the point where Democrats think that its now time to pack up and go home. The consequences of such action will be dire if history is any guide - and it always is.