What I read about Vietnam is that it failed because of the lack of will and what they called “gradualism”. They explain that gradualism is where the we (USA)began pausing in our efforts and thus gave the enemy time to recover and regain strength because of fear of using too much strength.

It states in this report called “Gradualism- Fuel of Wars:

The first- a cardinal feature of the Eisenhower years- was to ensure peace through unmistakable determination to protect vital U.S. interests anywhere in the world. This determination was made plainly evident to all through Administration statements and deeds. It was a policy of credible firmness, which retained initiative and freedom of action in American hands. There was no apology for strength, and no mistaking the sterness of the national will.
And America stayed at peace.
Beginning in 1961, however, two new doctrines began to evolve that have radically altered our nation’s defense planning. One is known as “flexible repsonse”; the other is called “gradualism.” Both doctrines de-emphasize our strength, leash our power and replace our superiority with “parity,” all in the euphoric hope that through demonstrations of peaceful purpose and restraint, America would entice her sworn enemies away from aggression.
However well intended, these departures have been tragic for our country. Prudent firmness was displaced by extreme caution, hesitancy, then indecisiveness. As doctrines of response, not of intiative, they have created a worldwide crisis of confidence in U.S. deterrence, undermined our alliances and divided the nation. In place of peace they have actually fostered aggression and escalated a war.
Flexible response, in the current thinking, does not mean, as it has historically meant, the capability to respond to a variety of threats with applicable and sufficient force to crush them. It now means that an aggressor’s military excursions will initially encounter only comparable force-i.e., it is a deliberate policy of reaction, leading to stalemate.

Thus war is invited, as aggressors are given the freedom to choose the time, place and means of doing battle, all with an acceptable risk. Assured that America’s crushing force will be dribbled into battle, the military marauder is encouraged to bellieve that even a protracted conlfict will be pursued on his terms.

As this new version of “flexible respinse” invites war once it has begun. The policy says that, just as with our first reactions to aggression, subsequent U.S. reactions will also be cautiously phased to prevent overapplication of force. The process can hardly fail to nourish a skirmish into a major war. Moreover, after each carefully restrained escalation there will be a “pause.” This ingenuous stratagem provides in a effect a one-sided military recess during which the enemy is importuned to recalculate his risks and contritely review his indiscretions as his own depredations continue. The “pause” occurring when the aggressor’s force has been at least temporarily stalemated by our military effort, actually enables our enemy to recoup his strength at his most vulnerable moment. Thus rejuvenated by successive pauses, he continues and intensifies the struggle.

America’s laboratory for testing gradualism has been in Vietnam. There it has failed- it has prolonged and escalated the war.
Published in 1968

There is more be I think you get the idea. We are during this in especially when it comes to Iran!

I guess my response would be, “So, should we let them win and just pull out.” That would only serve to embolden them. They would take over the entire country and it would be worse off than before we went in.

It is a battle of wills and we need to be stronger than them. Are we Americans so comfortable in our prosperity that we are too weak to stand up for anything that doesn’t directly affect us? Why are their wills stronger than ours? This is the greatest country on this earth and we can’t stand up to a destructive ideology? There’s something wrong there.

I’m not concerned with Canada, those guys were found. They’re here in the United States as well, I bet on it. The difference between what just happened anything else the terrorists have done is that the terrorists failed…again. They’re failing because we are not letting them rest.

Guess where the first mentions of “Vietnam” came from? Hint: it wasn’t the terrorists. Hint: It was any Iraqi. Hint: It wasn’t the military fighting this war. Nope, it was the Democrats and defeatists. The “guerilla’s” just picked up on that and ran with it, knowing our leftist media would take the torch from them and continue the race with it.

This is just the start of the media war against the military. They have tasted blood and want to bring the military beast down.

Papa Ray