I think a new question can be asked – do the people who oppose these wars have a legitimate message or not?  In other words, are they merely opposing war for the sake of opposing it, or do you think they are opposing the kind of war? 

Based on what I have seen, it is based on an agenda.  On one of my homepages I see the AP news headlines, and I regularly see headlines which talk about U.S. troops dying or how violence is somehow really bad.  What I think is that the same people who oppose conservative social and financial policies have joined the bandwagon to harp against the U.S. in Iraq.  I don't think that this is the case with all the opposition, but some of it.  I think back to when Clinton bombed a factory in Somalia back in 1998 at the height of the Lewinsky problem, and I really only remember hearing a little bit of condemnation of that (by the Beastie Boys at a music awards ceremony).  One might have thought there would be more condemnation of such a unilateral act back then by the left.So getting to the point of what I'm saying, perhaps it's not entirely the same people who opposed Vietnam that also oppose Iraq today.  I don't think that politics were quite as bitterly divided between right and left as they are nowadays.  One thing that I found interesting - growing up I'd hear stories or watch movies about Vietnam, and it seemed like a big horror story.  But about a year ago I watched a show on the history channel where it discussed actual battles and engagements.  The U.S. soldiers actually did a superior job at fighting in terms of loss of life.  This was not quite the story that I thought I knew.

Are you saying those are numbers of people killed?

I was watching Fox News last night and they raised comparisons to the political end of Vietnam and Iraq.  They discussed whether a Democratic victory this Fall would usher in a “Withdraw Now” push as what evidently happened in the 1970s.  It was argued that this would not happen, but that there would be a possibility that a Democrat Congress would start tying the setting of specific withdrawal or other action dates by the President into other bills (such as spending bills?).  Based on this it seems that the anti-war crowd was more vocal and/or powerful during the 1970s if they were demanding immediate withdrawal.     

Good point.                                                                                                                                                                                                 I think this is the case  no matter who is occupying who. Wouldn't we be resentful if we were occupied by a foreign nation?

Myself personally if a ruler like Saddam Hussein was our dictator i would have been happy to been invaded by those trying to free me given who i am and the knowledge i have today. If i were raised within that dictatorship being brainwashed with the propaganda i may also feel differently.