Vietnam probably doesn't have much in the way of resources although Brown and Root made their appearance. It was a different war, however, because it was predicated on the illusory domino theory.
It was never an idea to capture oil or business in Vietnam. LBJ felt he had to continue the senseless war to promote his power as a world leader. This is similar to Bush's approach but the difference is that there is the issue of oil. Religious convictions have played a part in wartime philosophy. Niebuhr rationale applies here. But remember ostensibly there wasn't a pre-emptive strike there. If it was behind the scenes, it wasn't as blatant as what Bush has done.
It seems to be that no one wants to accept Bush's affiliations with oil companies and his inheritance from his father in the oil business from Odessa Texas. What is clear is that there is an attempt at hegemony and power grabs here.

Vulgar-Marxist isn't enough of an argument to discredit Heard. This is an opinion and not a fact. It actually is attempt to paint Heard as a Marxist which is a dirty word today so the argument becomes ad hominem.

Do you really believe that Bush is conducting his war because he professes belief in Jesus? I think that this deception is geared toward a blatant manipulation of the so-called religious right. This involves a enemy posing image of the Muslim community and plays on the prejudice of the fundamentalists. It's a good propaganda technique.

So why are we at war? It leaves America's business interests at stake. It certainly isn't about instituting democracy as conditions in Afghanistan show us. Bush will probably abandon Iraq once it is reduced to rubble. So much for Christian charity.

As to the Chavez election, it doesn't matter who likes it or not because he was democratically elected and it is being undermined by the so-called champions of democracy.

Frank Hamilton