And obviously the fool who wrote this has no clue.I don't think a lot of you understand how American Policy & Culture affects the rest of the World.
But the Bush stance is more rhetorical than real. Having seen American casualties soar in Iraq and its troops make little headway, the White House knows it has to forge broader support behind its anti-terrorist strategy.....Vietnam is the primary example of the dangers in acting virtually alone. Iraq remains another.
Comparing Vietnam to Iraq negates his entire argument:But the Bush Administration needed luck and perfect management to pull off its unilateral Iraqi strategy. It had neither. Its base of international support has been too narrow to withstand its inability to sustain control of Iraq. And without such control its broader Middle East strategy was a non-starter.
We were in Vietnam ten years, lost 58,000 men and never came close to toppling Ho Chi Mihn or his cohorts because of the restrictive policies of LBJ.
We've been in Iraq 20 months, have unfortunately lost 1100 brave soldiers yet have toppled the Sadaam regime and are in fact, working towards building a freely elected government.
If the rest of the world wants to be pissed at the United States and are basing it on half-truths and mis-characterizations as this article does they can go f^ck themselves!