"I agree. To a great extent, of course, it depends on how durable the Iraqi resistance is. It was not, after all, the anti-war movement that was _primarily_ responsible for getting the u.s. out of Vietnam; it was the capacity of the Vietnamese peasantry to endure and fight back. " END QUOTE
Comment: I would not necessarily dispute the relative influence of events in the home-land of imperialism and in the theater it exerts its' will. I might dispute the exact weightings.
I do however think that the frequent comparison to Vietnam is not a clear-cut one, perhaps largely for ONE Reason above others:
Vietnam had an open and recognised political force that espoused its national liberation. One moreover that appeared to have a degree of political hegemony in the colony. I do not think the same can be so unequivocally stated for Iraq;
I think that unless there is an OPEN face to the hidden struggle, analogies to Vietnam are regretably over-optimistic.
None of what I have said here, belies my essential support of the rest that Cox says on THIS matter on the occupation. Notwithstanding the frequent blasts from Doug.
Doug: If you preach that debate should be more civil on the left, and on this list in particular - you should endeavour to practice a bit of it. Especially at this wonderful season of generosity.
However galling some (many?) on this list are - including young Cox - you are the moderator. Your choice might be put as: Set the tone - or accept that others will not. Hari