At the start of the conflagration they warned that Iraq was not another Afghanistan (which seems quite strange since Afghanistan had never really been conquered from the outside before) and that a quick win would be impossible and failure inevitable.

In fact the war was barely weeks old when all the media wanted to call it a quagmire and recall the ancient failures of Vietnam. Of course, with the modern military in charge, it wasn't a quagmire and soon our forces were advancing faster than any military assault in history.

The quagmire idea was quickly discredited and the allies won an amazingly quick and resounding victory.

But today the same leftists and media pundits are again calling for a quagmire, almost with ‘I told you so' pride. Almost as if they are happy to be vindicated with each American or ally death.

Of course, Iraq is anything but another Vietnam. And the Iraqi quagmire doesn't need to be a quagmire at all.

To understand this, perhaps it is best to start with an understanding of why Vietnam was what is was and why the Iraqi War, to date, has been so different.

First, the Vietnam War was fought solely for political purposes. It was fought to keep Communism from advancing in SE Asia. This is unlike the current Iraqi War which is part of a broader response to the terrorists destruction of the World Trade Center in New York which is more akin to the US response in WWII.

Yes, I know, some are claiming that it was about Bush I not finishing the job or about the Iraqi attempted assassination of Bush I or even about oil. Of course, Bush I stopped his advance on Bagdad for political purposes, and if there is some sweet revenge for the attempted assassination of an American President I don't mind in the least. I don't want Iraq or Cuba or anyone else thinking that its ok to assassinate an American President. And, in the question of oil, it is becoming more clear every day that it was France, Russia and even the UN itself that had their political actions imbedded in oil.

Another striking difference is the fact that while Vietnam was fought with conscription, the Iraqi War has been fought with volunteers. No one is being forced into slavery to sacrifice their life unwillingly. The brave men and women of the armed forces volunteered for the job. They are doing a fine job and every American of all political persuasions owe them a personal debt. Some of the signs being displayed at the anti-war rallies are disgusting. Just as disgusting is the call of one Democratic Senator to reestablish the draft so that resistance to the war could be magnified.

And of course, the enemy is much different this time. Instead of fighting against one side of an internal civil war, we fought against one of the most brutal governments on the face of the planet. Ho Chi Minh was educated in the US and learned about freedom here. When he went back home to fight for that freedom for his people he found an occupying French enemy that we supported because of the war in Europe. If it weren't for our predisposition for the French, perhaps he would have been successful in his revolution and been our stop to Communism.

But the biggest mistake of the Vietnam War was lack of commitment to victory. Presidents Johnson and Nixon didn't want a victory because it risked the direct involvement and confrontation with either the Soviets or Chinese (the Soviets were Vietnam's main backers and the Chinese bordered Vietnam and could become involved if they were convinced that We would win and be sitting on their doorstep).

It was this decision to stop short of victory that lead to 60,000 American lives being lost in the struggle. It was this decision that turned the American public away from support for the war (the American public did support stopping Communism). And it is this decision that brought the word quagmire to the lips and pens of every American pundits of the time.

And it is this troublesome remembrance, along with the left's call for a Politically Correct war, that troubles me today. For the most part, it has been an amazingly PC war. We have attacked only military targets, leaving as much of the country's infrastructure intact as possible. We have used our technology to avoid killing civilians, even though the enemy hides behind civilians. But there must be limits on political correctness when it endangers our men and our very purpose for being there.

If the Bush administration gives in and fails to give our fighting men the right to defend themselves and clear out our enemies from their strong posts, then we do run the danger of sliding back into a Vietnam-like situation where we are no longer playing to win.

The Left's Political Correctness dictates that we count every dead Iraqi as one killed by American military action. The terrorists flooding into Iraq who obviously have no respect for Iraqi lives must be killing no one. And no off-set is allowed for the thousands that Saddam is no longer killing. PC says that any insurrection led by any unhappy cleric (Sadr) means that we are oppressive even though we may have the support of the masses or the highest Ayatollah (Sistani) in the country. PC tells us that every lamentable death died in the name of freedom is in vain. PC says we, as the world's only super power, should have no right to defend ourselves as generations immemorial have done.

It is my personal opinion that these politically correct are themselves racist (they feel that only western civilizations have the right to personal freedom while Mideastern cultures are backward and don't have the right to live in the same enlightened world as we do) even while they proclaim America racists (well - that is another story for another time).

But the bottom line here is that Washington should give back command to our troops in the field and tell them to win this war. Political Correctness is a luxury we just cannot afford. In the Mideast, nuance and subtlety are lost; power is respected. We need the respect of bin Laden and his followers. Once we display a determination to win, the country will clam down again and we can then hand over control to democratic government before departing.

-Murrel Rhodes