I am about pride and saving face. We disgraced the military and the country by quitting. Now, I never thought that we should have been in Vietnam in the first place. We suffered from not paying attention to history. Other countries tried what we did and failed. I see no reason why we would have made a difference. But then again, that war was being fought by the politicians and the military had to fight with one hand tied behind their backs. Perhaps if the politicians had let General Westmorland fight the North the way he wanted, things would have been different. Just like if Clinton had allowed tanks and bradleys in Somalia like the General that was running that conflict had asked for, things would have been different as well. The military got to run WWI, WWII and Desert Storm and you see the results of that? We won hands down. The wars that politicians want to fight, Vietnam, Somalia were all lost. Do you see a pattern here? I see the same thing happening now and it disturbs me. We can win in Iraq, but we have to be able to do it by letting the generals run the war, not the politicians. Politicians need to do what they do best, lying, cheating and pandering their way into and staying in office and let the military do what they do best, fight and win wars.
Bruce Gruss Gott wrote: > And what'd we lose by leaving Vietnam and Somalia? Seems like there > was zero downside. What's the big win that we missed\ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:263304 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
