To invoke Vietnam was a blunder too far for Bush

The Presidents's crass comparison between Iraq and war in south east Asia was the most ludicrous misreading of history

How do I dislike President George Bush? Let me count the ways. Most of them have to do with his contented assumption that 'faith' is, in and of itself, a virtue. This self-satisfied mentality helps explain almost everything, from the smug expression on his face to the way in which, as governor of Texas, he signed all those death warrants without losing a second's composure.

It explains the way in which he embraced ex-KGB goon Vladimir Putin, ... Full Story »

Posted by Leo Romero

See All Reviews »

Review

Peter Henry
4.0
by Peter Henry - Oct. 1, 2008

A well-written and engaging piece by a pro-Iraq War pundit, listing the differences between Iraq and Viet Nam. One major point is Viet Nam was fighting to keep itself from being split up, whereas Hitchens implies our presence in Iraq is preventing Iraq from splitting into chaos. I wouldn't go as far as Hitchens when he rewrites history to claim that the Viet Namese fought the Khmer Rouge "on our behalf" - the U.S. were the prime international backers of that genocidal regime! Of course as a pro-warrior Hitchens ignores the elementary fact that there would be no chaos in Iraq, nor in Viet Nam, except for the wars of aggression that the U.S. has carried out in both places, much to the resentment of the locals. Sow the wind, inherit the whirlwind.

See All Reviews »

Peter's Rating

Overall
4.0

Good
from 13 answers
Quality
3.9
Facts
3.0
Fairness
2.0
Information
4.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
5.0
Accuracy
4.0
Balance
1.0
Context
4.0
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
4.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »