Those who want President George W. Bush out of office like to compare the Iraq War II with the Vietnam War.  Critics use it as a scare tactic, but the two wars have little in common.  The radical Islamic groups causing chaos in Iraq would do well to study the Vietnam War, that is, if they could stop their terrorism long enough to study history.  North Vietnam's resistance of America was natural but unwise.  The U.S. has never had a reputation for staying in a country it invaded.  America just doesn't operate that way. 

Vietnam is a poor country today because the North insisted on fighting against the American invaders.  Vietnam stepped on one of their own landmines when they resisted the U.S.  They'd likely be a wealthy nation today, have free speech, and freedom of religion, if they'd been smart enough to comply.  Instead, they fought and lost two million of their own people. 

They may have fought persistently, but today they are corrupt and inefficient.  Apparently they were more "ingenious" soldiers than politicians or entrepreneurs.  For all their guerrilla tactics, tunnels, and jungle traps, Vietnam now stands as another example of failed communism.  

An important question to ask is, which groups are still resisting in Iraq?  They know we're not going to stay.  So why are they resisting, especially as we near key elections and hand-over dates?  Maybe they're the ones who benefited the most from Saddam's regime.  Maybe they're the ones who'd least profit from a democracy.  Maybe they're enemies of the whole free world and not just the U.S.  Is the resistance of the insurgence going to ultimately help or hinder Iraq? 

On further reflection, maybe there is at least one important parallel between Iraq and Vietnam, like how America's enemies never seem to learn from history.