A1NewsPage.com
Who is responsible for Vietnam? JFK? LBJ? Nixon? None of the above?
Without equating the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to Vietnam, this is a question that should be asked when a president takes on a war, or in this case two wars, started by his predecessor.
Things seem to be looking up in Iraq yet not so much in Afghanistan. President Obama campaigned on opposing the former and extending the latter while President Bush, at last call, seemed to support staying the course in both.
It should be reasonable to ask how history will determine the outcomes of these wars. If we “win” both, does the person who started them get the credit or the person who finished them? The same could be asked if we “lose” both wars.
History generally applauds or condemns depending on the end result rather than the beginning. You certainly do not hear people blaming Vietnam on Kennedy, yet both Johnson and Nixon, who both waffled between escalating and de-escalation bear the brunt of blame.
No matter how this all turns out, it will be interesting to see how the history books will define the decade. Even more interesting will be to see how wars are fought based not only on the merits of the war, but by politicians looking at their legacy.
Posted by DarrenStaley as News, Politics, War on Terror at 10:55 PM MDT