Recently, I read an article by Paul Musgrave. In it, he argued that the American defeat in the Iran conflict will prove to be a bigger, costlier, more glaring defeat for the United States than the conflict in Vietnam proved to be.
Frankly, he made some compelling arguments. While it may seem a ridiculous argument on the surface, since Vietnam saw many more casualties on both sides and lasted seemingly forever, the Iran conflict might prove to be costlier and more compromising for the United States.
Musgrave argues (see link to article below):
The absence of substantial U.S. casualties in this conflict also masks the scale of the U.S. defeat. To be sure, the war has been deadly: Thousands of Iranians, combatants and civilians, have died in the fighting. Americans, however, have endured far fewer deaths: To date, fewer than 20 U.S. soldiers have died—and many of those in a single strike.
Indeed, there is no argument that the war in Vietnam saw more suffering, more casualties and injured. But that is not what Musgrave is suggesting when he talks about Iran being a bigger defeat than Vietnam ever was. What he is arguing is that while the actual purpose, the reason for fighting (the "domino theory" in Southeast Asia) largely felt irrelevant by the time that the United States pulled it's forces out of Vietnam, the same cannot be said for the war with Iran.
Again, let's see what Musgrave specifically says:
Yet those observations do not change the fact that, for the United States itself, the consequences of a costly defeat were, in the long run, relatively minor and inward-looking. The United States emerged from the wider Cold War triumphant. Vietnam itself is a power surprisingly friendly to the United States today.
Compare that situation with the aftermath of Trump’s war. The United States is inarguably in a weaker position than when it began this war of choice, with core U.S. strategic objectives harmed.
Contrast how its military performance has seemed during this conflict with the U.S.-led coalition’s war to reverse Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s conquest of Kuwait. In the 1990-91 conflict, the seeming ease with which Iraq’s military was dismembered stunned the world.
Now there, Musgrave makes a solid point. True, the United States did not look stronger as a result of the Vietnam conflict. Yet, it clearly did not derail American resolve in the Cold War. I am not entirely certain that I would agree with the United States emerging triumphant after the Cold War. That attitude itself feels like part of the problem, the nationalistic hubris that helped to produce this disastrous Trump presidency to begin with. Nonetheless, the point is taken. The war in Vietnam was sobering for Americans, but it did not come at as critical a time as this defeat to Iran has come, with the world largely losing faith in, and even turning against, the United States.
Musgrave continues:
The effects on U.S. leadership in the global system have been more profound. Regional allies, many of whom reportedly argued against the venture, bore the brunt of the costs of the fighting. Most tellingly, Iran learned that its capacity to throttle the Strait of Hormuz could deliver economic leverage on a worldwide scale.
Indeed. I will admit to having been opposed to both the Iraq and Iran wars. So I had no great faith in the outcomes of either war. But while the United States did not triumph as brilliantly as George W. Bush bragged about during his infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech on the aircraft carrier, it nevertheless is nothing compared to 's waffling, claiming that what we are doing is a war, then backing off, claiming that we won within the first couple of hours, then saying that the war continue, then saying Iran was completely incapacitated, then being unable to remove them from blocking the Straight of Hormuz. Add to that his asking for help from the same allies he had insulted not long before, as well as his previous claims from the summer of 2025 that he had "totally obliterated" Iran's nuclear capabilities, and what you have is a fiasco that went much further towards discrediting the United States, and it's choice of leadership, than either Vietnam or Iraq did.
This war was begun by Donald Trump. It was all his decision, dating back to when he decided to tear up the Iran treaty under Obama's leadership. That in and of itself undermined credibility in American leadership. This, however, proved to be worse, with Trump's repeated conflicting claims (again, the whole "totally obliterated" claim) and what proved to be a complete and utter disaster with the United States failing to bring Iran to heel, or to end their nuclear capabilities or, again, to prevent them from bringing the world economy to it's knees by controlling the Straight of Hormuz. And again, American allies paid a steep price, especially early in this war. The only people who will not admit that the United States came out looking weaker and less capable, and Iran came out looking stronger, are the incompetent idiots in the Trump White House. Everyone else sees clearly that this was truly a disaster.
So it feels like Musgrave does have a point. And it is something which the United States will continue to pay for long after Trump is gone. Even different leadership will have a difficult time trying to undo the damage which Trump's war has caused the United States, Musgrave explains:
The United States, under whatever management, will confront these consequences while being itself weakened at home and abroad. Its allies will have less confidence in its capabilities; its public will be less willing to bear the costs of even productive engagement; its rivals will be likelier to challenge Washington’s will. Those results will be far more lasting and severe than the U.S. failure in its war in Vietnam.
Agreed. Not only did Trump's clear and obvious miscalculations prove costly in this war, it may set trends which will further compromise the United States in the future. Also, it cannot be overstated that the timing of this, coming as it does at a time when the entire world seems to be losing faith in Americans and their chosen leadership, only contributes more to the growing perception that the United States now appears clearly to be a power in decline, even sharp decline.
Below is the link to the article which got me on this topic, and from which I obtained all of the specific parts of the article used above:
Iran Is a Bigger Defeat Than Vietnam by Paul Musgrave, associate professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar, June 16, 2026
A war of choice has turned into a strategic disaster for Washington.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2026/06/16/iran-vietnam-strategy-defeat/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialads&tpcc=Facebook_PaidSocial_Bof&utm_id=120233776133040637&utm_content=120248472448350637&utm_term=120233776191200637&utm_campaign=120233776133040637&fbclid=IwY2xjawT8vB9wZG9mBWV4dG4DYWVtATAAYWRpZAGrNkYzAxSdc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHgsP9hEl1mGZra8JtOaaaMVLJC9gNp4luOtGfa46pV4B8Ph42U7odJ4wTB5-_aem_RN8g1Ythmj1UHqxXnHCnXQ
No comments:
Post a Comment