Path: not-for-mail
From: PlainBill <PlainBill47@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.d
Subject: Re: {ASSD} I don't know about y'all
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:51:25 -0700
Message-ID: <il1f04dob9u1cttpelioaqbo67c08ddr93@4ax.com>
References: <jcDNj.9628$2g1.5854@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 52
Organization: Qwest Communications Corporation
NNTP-Posting-Host: 50ef9105.news.qwest.net
X-Trace: DXC=4GU]GSeN[j\j[AEkXmiMEZF85SKJoGf>Th7@UQ2WKBHQo65hL7_7WMP]kg^=aaNh>]5fjhGUn3M=\][Mme3d?Z]Q
X-Complaints-To: news@qwest.net
===================
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:42:38 -0500, "cmsix" <cmsix@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I don't know about y'all, but to me it looks like W is running his war
>nearly as well as Lyndon Johnson ran the VietNam war. Never can tell though,
>he might let us down at the last.
>
>cmsix
>
And your point is that Bush is stupider than Johnson and Nixon
combined? I'd tend to agree with you, EXCEPT Bush not only makes his
own mistakes, he has Cheney making more of them.
Look at the history. We got involved in Vietnam because of the Lodge
doctrine that Communism Is Evil, and must be stamped out where ever
possible. This worked in Cental and South America when the 'enemy was
a poorly equipped and trained third world army trying to fight a
conventional war.
Because of the arrogance of the Eisenhower administration, it was
assumed that we could succeed where the French failed. Granted, the
French army's record in WWII did not give them much credibility.
However, even an idiot should have noticed the Vietnamese Communists
were not fighting a conventional war. Advisers were sent, followed by
hundreds, then thousands, then tens of thousands of troops. It was
only when the Democratic congress got fed up with the mess and refused
to fund the war that Nixon finally gave up.
To give the desk jockies in the Pentagon their due, they analysed
the failures in Vietnam and identified at least part of the problem.
Decisions that should have been made 'on the ground' were being made
in Washington by people who had no idea what was actually happening.
It is to be noted that the First Gulf War was controlled by commanders
on site, and realised it's objectives quickly. The only major fuckup
occurred because Bush I stuck his hand in and decreed hostilities
would end 100 hours after the first attack.
It should be noted that in '94 Cheney was asked why we had not
invaded Iraq. His answer then was instructive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I It is to be noted that his
position changed by the time he had accululated a sizeable interest in
Halliburton. And of course, any possibility of allowing military
decisions to be made by the military were blocked.
Actually, a point could be made that Bush and Cheney have not
failed in Iraq. They were eager to make lots of money for the rich
asshole businessmen who supported them. The Iraq war has made
thousands of defense contractors wealthy. It has also demonstrated
our inability to fight a war 'on the cheap'. And firmly cemented
Bush's position in history as a 'War President'. Too bad for the
little jerk that his legacy will be 'Incompetent War President'.
PlainBill