With his daughter getting married, his administration wiretapping all of his political enemies, paranoia running rampant and everyone in the country high out of their minds on coke, Bush has finally come to realize that his pointless, unwinnable war is exactly like Johnson and Nixon's pointless, unwinnable war. Because while before we were fighting in Iraq to prevent Iraq from fighting in us, or something, now we fight there so that Pol Pot doesn't rise from the dead and take over. It's true! Bush is going to deliver a speech about it and everything!

One unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of Americas withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like "boat people," "re-education camps," and "killing fields."

If we don't win in Iraq now we'll have to deal with Oliver Stone movies about it later, people. It's that simple.

For some crazy reason, "historians" are alarmed and appalled by this comparison. Because it seems to suggest that Bush thinks we didn't win in Vietnam because we didn't stick with it long enough, and few historians now believe that we lost because John Kerry and Jane Fonda threatened to add LSD our troops' water supply, forcing Nixon to withdraw before his Cambodian Surge had time to really work.

Bush's Iraq-Vietnam Parallel [NYT]


How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)


©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc