This is by far the most igorant argument made by extreme liberals.  Cetainly if you oppose the war its one of the arguments you will make but is it valid or is it just a classic scare tactic to try and win an argument and lose a war?

The polls that indicate conflicting sentiment between opposing the war and needing to be there to prevent terrorism is proof enough of the difference between vietnam and Afghanistan.  And thats without bothering to consider the enemy and the fact that the Taliban bares no resembelence to the North Vietnamese whatsoever.  As far as troop levels as a parrallel, c'mon every war in history increases troop levels until victory.  Before using this argument at least wait for the draft to start.  About the only parallel that exists between the two wars is that if we leave we lose.

Whats worse, liberals will lose come election day 2012 because Republicans won't need a swift boat ad to prove Democrats are weak on defense.  Depending on the other legs of the election stool, healtcare and jobs, democrats won't have a leg to stand on if they abandon Afghanistan or do not do everything possible to win by stabalizing the region.

But here is how liberals can win:

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-345400