Drawing parallels between Vietnam and Afghanistan

Lost in Transformation made a post about a poll cnn took that found most Americans believe the war on terror has become similar to the situation we faced in Vietnam. It is pointed out that a main difference is that Americans can link the war on terror to the attacks that occured on 9/11. This war is fought by volunteers, no one is being forced to die for a cause they don't believe in. And although any of our servicemen losing their lives is a tragedy, we have faced a mere fraction of the casualties experienced in the Vietnam War.

According to the blog post 59% of the public disagrees with sending more troops to Afghanistan, but at the same time 2/3rds of the public believe that without sending troops in, we will not be able to "prevent terrorists from using Afghanistan as a operation base for planning future attacks." If people are not willing to send more troops, but believe that without troops we endanger our safety, it is no wonder Americans believe that we are working our way into a war that we will not be able to pull out of successfully.

The poster believes that by speeding up fighting in Afghanistan we can avoid another Vietnam. But that is too convenient. It would be great to blink your eyes and the situation goes away, but that is not happening. Killing more people faster is not going to change their culture in a way that makes us safe from terrorism. There has to be a change from the ground up in the civilization.

The biggest factor is yet to be seen. If we stay another 8 years and end up leaving with our tail between our legs this may even be worse than Vietnam. However, if we can succeed in changing the culture and their view on our society then maybe the war will be able to end positively.

Health Reform in the General Public

According to Stanford’s “Building Sensible Health Care Solutions” project 7/10 Americans agree the current health care system is a major issue that needs to be addressed immediately by Congress but they were very divided about what exactly is wrong and how to fix it. This is a trend found not only in the American public but within our lawmakers as well. Everyone can agree the system is broken, but no one can agree how exactly to fix it. There are, however, some startling contradictions like 62% saying they were fine with the current system, and 68% saying that it does not work for most Americans. Perhaps revamping the entire system is not worth it if 60% of America is doing fine? These figures make it seem like taxing the so called “Cadillac” insurance plans would sacrifice the 60% of Americans who don’t have trouble with their current insurance plan. The public option and the private firms should be able to exist independently without hurting each other. If the only way to cover the 40% of Americans without adequate coverage is to take funds away from those who feel they have enough that solution simply is not viable. The goal should be that 100% of Americans have an equal opportunity to medical treatment. Politicians and consumers alike should be ready to face trade offs in order to meet the needs of the intended goal of 100% coverage for all Americans. Luckily Stanford’s “Building Sensible Health Care Solutions” project can give our politicians a better grasp on what exactly Americans want out of their health system.