Teresita, your participation in this forum is, for me, a joy and I certainly hope that you continue to participate.

However, I completely refute your evaluation of the fall of Viet Nam and your characterization of the events in Iraq. Iraq suffers from mulitiple insurgencies, but they are not just foreigners and they do not just employ suicide tactics.

Viet Nam was not about reunification; it was about one group, the communists, taking over the southern half of the country which had previously been under the control of a (supposedly) elected autocracy that we unwisely propped up without insisting on rooting out corruption.

The Viet Cong were such a minor influence, basically incapable of combat operations after breaking themselves during the 1968 Tet Offensive. No, Teresita, by the time Saigon fell in 1975 it was the Regular NVA who were knocking at the doors.

The fall of Baghdad under the ISG recommendations would have looked tactically more like the race to win Kabul that occurred in the time following the withdrawal of the Soviets from Afghanistan. As the Americans withdrew, the forces of whatever force intended to take over that area would be hot on our heels, speeding us on to increase their moral victory.

Laos and Cambodia were their Pakistan, or Syrian border, or Iranian IED trafficking routes… whatever.

Afghanistan is tactically more similar to Viet Nam than Iraq, but the fall of Baghdad as the weakened US Army was routed by a resurgent Al Qaeda/Jaish/Mahdi Army/(place your insurgent group name here) would have resembled the panicked flight from Saigon in 1975.