CNN - Dean: U.S. can't win Iraq war

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/06/dean.iraq/index.html

The idea that we are going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain wrong.
— Howard Dean

DEAN: "Of course, the South Vietnamese couldn't manage to support their own country," Dean said. "I do not believe in making the same mistake twice. And America appears to have made the same mistake twice."

Question: Wouldn't this assessment be incorrect in that the US only did the Vietnam thing once. In order to do Vietnam again, we would need to get involved in Vietnam again, no? This is Iraq, isn't it?

DEAN: 'Calling President Bush's plan in Iraq a "failed strategy, Dean said he and most Democrats support bringing home an estimated 80,000 National Guard and reserve troops within the next six months.'

Question: Wouldn't an action of this kind then bring Dean’s prediction(s) to fruition. Doesn't this sound like a surefire way to make Iraq akin to the Vietnam experience?

Dean said that he backed the redeployment of 20,000 troops to Afghanistan and a force in the Middle East to deal with al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, but not in Iraq.

Question: Where in the Middle East? A friendly country? What are the true logistics of something along this line? Is it as easy as say in a video game? Can it be done within a 24 news cycle as things appear to require these days?

I don’t understand various arguments made against the action in Iraq. Is it a case of someone like Howard Dean feeling that Iraq is just like Vietnam or could be just like Vietnam if he and others had their way.

Is it a case of Dean and others having claimed Iraq to be a “quagmire,” like “Vietnam,” (as Afghanistan was considered almost immediately, by the way), in the hope that it becomes just that? Isn’t that kind of not cool? If Dean and others of his thinking have there way, will it then be marked down as a mistake of the Bush Administration so that any blame would not be theirs or history rewritten that way? Wouldn’t this kind of back fire on all of us? It strikes me that just pulling out and trying to forget it is a surefire means to make Iraq another Vietnam type war.

Although one would think only Vietnam could be Vietnam and Iraq, Iraq.

And there is no reason… that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the — of — the historical customs, religious customs.
— John Kerry
John Kerry recent remarks - Why is John Kerry doing the same things over and over again? Shouldn't he stop living in the past? Howard and John; isn't the true mirroring of Vietnam and Iraq just where they stand and not really alike as they say?

Why on his website does he have a statement dated November 30th that reads:

"I want to start by saying that our troops in Iraq are serving with bravery and resolve of the highest caliber. These are truly some of the most amazing men and women I've ever met. I respect them and their commitment to our country and our world tremendously. And that's why we owe it to them to have an honest conversation about Iraq. "

Yet I understand he had some interesting remarks more recently in stating the terrorizing of Iraqi civilians, women and children like the soldiers during Vietnam. Is his assessment of American soldiers in Iraq as accurate as his assessment of American soldiers in Vietnam? By claiming soldiers are "terrorizing," isn't he intimating "terrorism?" Is this what he thinks of our soldiers? Am I missing some nuance in here? Is it just me?

Am I as stupid, as some of you that may disagree with me on this, think I am?