Answer:
1. There are some tactical parallels between Iraq and Vietnam. However, these two countries and conflicts might have taken place in an alternate dimension. In Iraq there is no Ho Chi Minh and no NVA.
2. The social dynamics of Iraq and Vietnam are totally different. Iraq is an Arab Tribal Society and the conflict is more inter-comunal in nature. The Shia spend as much time fighting each other as they spend fighting the Sunni's.
3. The only real and significant similarity between the two conflicts is the U.S. We learned allot from the Vietnam conflict. However, we did not learn enough since we made a number of the same mistakes.
If I may add - the enemy is not as clear cut as you may expect. In Vietnam women and children were helping the Vietcong in attacks against the US and allied troops. There are similarities in that respect now as well.
- Of course, on the tactical level this is a similarity. Of course I would explore the scope and scale of Vietcong employment of women compared with AQ and other groups. The employment of women in war is generally considered more repulsive in the Muslim. AQ's use of woman suicide bombers is considered repulsive by many men and women over there.
The tactical similarities are not the key difference between Vietnam and Iraq, the operational and strategic differences are the key.
Answer # 4 is a HUGE and all encompassing difference.
Answer:
Similarities:
Both conflicts included the US.
Both conflicts were wars within a country or a civil war (technically two at the time as Vietnam was then separated to North Vietnam and South Vietnam, but Vietnam had only been separated a few years).
The US was offensive on both conflicts, meaning they were not attacked or provoked (contrary to popular belief, Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11)
A Dictatorship was included in both (North Vietnam, and Saddam Hussein regime).
There was heavy civilian military involvement in both cases.
Both contests lasted much longer than your average war.
Both conflicts were extremely expensive (The Iraq War cost more though).
Both wars held very negative poll results in the US by the end of the war.
The weapons used in the wars were very similar (AK-47s by the Iraq/North Vietnamse forces, M-16/M-4 and associated weapons by the Coalition forces).
Differences
The dictatorship won in Vietnam, where as it lost in Iraq.
Vietnam was very much an equal battle. Although the North Vietnamse experienced much higher casulties, victories were shared.
Iraq is often reffered to by scholars not as a war, but as simply a one-sided bloodbath, as the coalition held all the victories and Iraq had by far the majority of casulties.
The Vietnamse War was a Coalition vs. Coalition conflict, whereas the Iraq War was a Coalition vs. Single Country conflict.
Vietnam terrain is jungle and often includes rain. It also makes the use of tanks extremely difficult. Iraq is desert and has little rain. Tanks are very useful in Iraq, because of the lack of obstacles.
In Vietnam, civilian military involvement was very much shared. There was even the NVA for the North. In Iraqi War, civilian military involvement is almost entirely towards the terrorists favor.
Vietnam was part of the Cold War, whereas Iraq War had nothing to do with the Cold War.
The Vietnam War was a much longer open battle, and was still continuing at the withdrawal of US forces. Iraq collapsed almost immediatly.
The only similarity is the Propaganda and the hidden truths from the public. This war is in the desert and the Vietnam War in the jungle. Both wars are horrific, but I would think fighting out on the desert in not only the high temperatures, but really no place to hide. At least the Vietnam war was fought in jungles and villages. Ask a Vietnam vet (online) what he thinks of this war and they almost always say there isn't much difference as far as not getting the whole truth and some cause for concern about any chemicals used during the war.
Iraq needed us to overthrow a dictator and the people of Iraq are glad (most of them according to the polls) we came to the rescue.
Vietnam was united against us and more people died there. The whole country wanted us out and they won that war - well, technically no one wins in war, but we left and it was our loss.
Answer
There is no difference between the two cases, the US Army was in Vietnam and in Iraq to do the same job : overthrow a dictator which don't complying with US Command and replace it by another dictator which is ready to cooperate and give the oil to MNC (multinational corporation).
answer1st answer is completely wrong cause iraqies didnt want the US help! no one told them to provide their "HELP"everybody knows they had came to get some oil...
and last thing Saddam wasn't a Dictator ! stop saying that in order to make a reason for your faults... Stop it
Neither had majority support from the nations of the world.
Neither had majority support from US citizens.
Both were begun on false premises: the domino theory and nuclear threat.
Both lasted to long without resolution or an end plan.
Both have cost far to much in men and material.
Not many. The US is not at war with Iraq. As with Germany, Japan, Italy, North Korea, and North Vietnam before it, the US was at war with those nations by aerial bombing and fighting those nation's armies. No such air bombardment is taking place against the Capital of Iraq...because no-one's at war Iraq. Terrorists are not supposed to be catagorized into the same "group" as the German Army, or Japanese Navy of WWII.
Using the term insurgent or guerrilla might make it similar. Some protesters make it similar. Lasting longer than WWII make it similar. However, insurgent and guerrilla's existed in the French Underground during WWII when they fought the Nazis (Germans). Protesters also existed during WWI and WWII.
Vietnam, Korea, WWI, WWII, were fought against a foreign country with a National Flag, and a standing Army, Navy, and Air Force. The US fought those countries and tried to defeat them. The US failed in only one of them, Vietnam.
The US is NOT FIGHTING IRAQ, the US is NOT fighting the Iraq army or air force. The US is NOT using aircraft to bomb Iraq into surrender. The US is performing a POLICE ACTION, which the dictionary defines as "...a relatively localized military action by regular armed forces...against insurgents...violating international peace and order."
A hit list of "Wanted Criminals" has been constantly put out to the Iraq public for the arrest of "Wanted" leaders. Sadam H. was arrested and hanged. This 21st century war is a bit different than our past 20th century wars.
The most obvious similarity between the wars in my eyes are the protesters that are disrespecting the soldiers and their families. There were Vietnamese and are Alqueda troops that are attacking their neighbors which we were/are trying to prevent.
The differences involve weapon technology is much different, the casualty rate is much lower now that it was during the Vietnam war, plus heavy vegetation vs desert.
These are the primary points that are coming to my mind. Also the training is different, back in Vietnam the training was more hands on. Kill anyone that is suspicus, but now traing is just to watch out for people and not really try to kill them but negotiate with them. Show them America is a freindly place.
Other than military presence and violence; None. 1. WWI was fought against the NATION's of Germany and their allies (the Central Powers). 2. WWII was fought against NATION's (Germany, Japan, and Italy). 3. The Korean War was fought against the NATION's of Red China and North Korea. 4. The Vietnam War was fought against the NATION of North Vietnam. Neither the US nor any other country is at war with Iraq. Just policing the area (arresting and terminating terrorists).
Iraq is a law enforcement problem. NO NATION is at war with Iraq.
The US was at war (was actually bombing North Vietnam with B-52's) North Vietnam. And don't bring up that point about "not being a declared war." The American Civil War wasn't declared either. Additionally, there hasn't been a US declared war since December 11, 1941 (when the US declared war on Germany & Italy).
WW2 was fought against Germany and japan. in Iraq we are fighting against a group or "movement" i.e the taliban instead of nations
some 1 come and give me a answer
None. The US is not at war with Iraq. In Vietnam, the US was at war with North Vietnam.
wars fought in middle east
i think there are a lot of comparison meaning that they both did somthing wong the difference now is the Iraq war are there in Iraq for the wrong reason so basically for no reason at all.
Generally computers (GPS) and safety first (Iraq) verses reading a map and mission first (Vietnam). The list would be long for either.
What the differences between Iraq war and Vietnam war?
Differences are technological in nature. The troops involved were equally heroic, the differences were national commitment, and the similarities again are that people died, children died, Families died, and military personnel died in pursuit of their nation's objectives. Differences are that deaths in Iraq continue and US deaths are rare in Vietnam.
Vietnam was a war against the nation of NORTH Vietnam and communism. Iraq is the restoration of law and order; and stability to the country.
1. The US is not at war with Iraq. 2. The US was at war with North Vietnam.
some 1 come and give me a answer
Law, Order, and Stability is trying to be restored to Iraq. The US was conducting open warfare against North Vietnam.
Stuff.
The US is not at war Iraq. The US was at war with a nation called North Vietnam.
None. Vietnam was a war against another nation (North Vietnam). Iraq is a police action in which law, order, and stability is trying to be established from withing the country. The US is NOT at war with Iraq.
The US is not at war with Iraq. The US was at war with North Vietnam.
None. The US is not at war with Iraq. In Vietnam, the US was at war with North Vietnam.
Instability.