Iraq War Analogies

From the moment the President first started talking about invading Iraq, we've heard comparison after comparison to the Vietnam War. But this analogy has never really struck me as accurate. But I was thinking about it this morning, and it occurred to me that the better analogy is to the American Civil War:

1) One side (Union/U.S.) wins a decisive and total victory over the other (Confederacy/Iraqi Baathists).

2) The outcome leads to political freedom and emancipation for (a) oppressed group(s) (Black Slaves/Iraqi Shiites and Kurds).

3) Disgruntled members of the formerly dominant group (White Southerners/Iraqi Sunnis), rather than leading a guerrilla struggle against the occupying army (Union/U.S. Army), start killing innocent civilians (Black Freedmen/Iraqi Shiites and Kurds) and those cooperating with the occupiers (Carpetbaggers and Scalawags/Iraqi Police and Government officials).

Number three is the one that really distinguishes the Iraq War from the Vietnam War. The Viet Cong, though they killed plenty of innocent Vietnamese, used the classic guerrilla strategy - harass the occupiers until they crackdown on the civilian population, thus causing the civilians to look to the guerrillas for protection. Therefore, the Viet Cong gained strength by winning real popular support. The Iraqi insurgents have instead opted for a terrorist strategy, a la the KKK, which wins them no popular support, but which they hope will eventually cause the U.S. to throw in the towel due to frustration.

The good news? The Union Army eventually crushed the KKK, causing it to disband (it later reformed in the 1910s).

The bad news? Eventually the White Southerners won anyway. The Northerners tired of Reconstruction after 11 years and basically ceded control back to the good ol' boys, who ruled the South uncontested for 80 years until the Civil Rights struggle began in the 1950s.

Here's to hoping that we don't have to wait until the 2090s to see Iraq ruled freely and democratically.