Re: Pres Bush Left His Unit to Avoid a Drug Test! A Repub

From: Mr Stu Pididiot (Stu_at_news.com)
Date: 09/25/04 

Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 00:31:25 -0400

"Eric Chomko" <echomko_at_@polaris.umuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cj1m5r$1ttd$1@news.ums.edu...
> Art (arty_faque@yahoo.com) wrote:
>
>
> : Eric Chomko wrote:
> : >
> : > Dennis M. Hammes (scrawlmark@arvig.net) wrote:
> : > : Art McNutt wrote:
> : > : >
> : > : > Eric Chomko wrote:
> : > : ...
> : > : > >
> : > : > > A failure to the point that we could rally and then attack the north above
> : > : > > the DMZ and seize Hanoi? Explain why that wasn't the next step.
> : > : >
> : > : > Because only YOU ever thought of it.
> : >
> : > : Not, actually. Westmoreland, like MacArthur in like case, was
> : > : removed from command for thinking of it more than once, and
> : > : Johnson's authorisation to Bomb Hanoi raised so much media stink he
> : > : refused to run for re-election in the belief it would cost his Party
> : > : the office (his replacement wasn't "good enough" in the campaign
> : > : sense to get it, anyway; one doesn't "groom a replacement" for a
> : > : President in his first term).
> : >
> : > Pleas provide a cite that LBJ intended to bomb Hanoi. I believe that the
> : > was what Goldwater stated.
>
> : Rolling Thunder rolled right to Hanoi's doorstep in 1968; and the only
> : logical next step was bombing Hanoi City, itself. CINCPAC, the Joint
> : Chiefs, Moscow, Beijing, Hanoi and The American public all knew this.
>
> Cite?
>
> : Dennis obviously means Johnson's authorization for greatly intensified
> : bombing of northern industrial targets; i.e., the heart of the
> : DRV--Hanoi, if you will.
>
> : Johnson stopped short, under the council of McNamara, of bombing Hanoi
> : City. He ended Rolling Thunder in October. McNamara is, in many senses,
> : an entire textbook demonstrating plainly to everyone (but himself) what
> : NOT to do in crisis.

Why overanalyze things? We got into a war of attrition
with an enemy that wanted it more. So, of course, we
lost it. The war of attrition was a result of our deciding
early on to contain, not conquer. This lack of determination
has to be chalked up to the underlying fear of the cold war
and it's nightmare scenarios.

>
> : The /actual/ bombing of Hanoi City was left to Linebacker I and II under
> : Nixon, and succeeded where Rolling Thunder had failed--Hanoi came to the
> : bargaining table under Linebacker I; they came BACK to the bargaining
> : table READY TO SERIOUSLY NEGOTIATE under Linebacker II.
>
> So they were ready to surrender? What stopped that from happening?
>
> : > Also, Westmoreland painted a too rosy picture of us winning in Vietnam
> : > which differed from what McNamara had learned. I believe that that
> : > assessment is what caused Westmoreland to get canned.
>
> : The Rand analysis was what McNamara had 'learned.' Yet it was fuking
> : McNamara's war, for cryin' out loud. He convinced Johnson to write a
> : blank check to Saigon. He convinced Johnson to lie to the American
> : Public about it. He convinced Johnson to tell the American public he
> : wouldn't raise the troop level there. Johnson was soon after forced to
> : raise the level of American troops there so that Westmoreland could do
> : the job he'd been ordered to do under McNamara's restraints. McNamara
> : told Johnson they must keep the Chinese involvment a secret. He's the
> : one who convinced Johnson that they couldn't risk bombing Hanoi or
> : Haiphong harbor for fear of pissing off the Soviets or Chinese. McNamara
> : was the one who convinced himself, and Johnson, that the bombing
> : campaign just simply wouldn't work.
>
> So McNamara engineered the Gulf of Tonkin conflict to get us into an overt
> operation in Vietnam?
>
> : Yes, getting rid of Westmoreland was just one more of McNamara's mistakes.
>
> Yeah, then McNamara resigns.
>
> I simply think your analysis is bull***! It doesn't fit with the facts.
>
> First off, Laird and other Sec. of Defs under Nixon had plenty of time to
> fix the screwups that you claim were left behind my McNamara. Nothing was
> fixed by the time we pulled the troops out in 73. Our ditch effort to win
> covertly ended in 75 with the final evacuation. Your spin doesn't change
> either of those facts.
>
> Second, your claim of the Linebacker missions as success didn't lead to a
> NV surrender as is your want. Again, you state something that doesn't fit
> with the facts. You and many others can't seem to handle that we didn't
> meet our objective in Vietnam. Spin yourself silly with terms like
> "stalemate" and the like, but when you start trying to convince yourself
> that we actually won, then you're simply full of crap. In your case it
> goes deeper. Pressed, you'll agree we failed, but then you'll spin that it
> was actually a Democratic Party loss (i.e. LBJ and McNamara's war) and
> that the Republicans "won" their part of the war. Somewhere in your
> Nixonian-like mind you're convinced that had the Democrat part of the
> war been anything but a total failure, then we would have won the war.
> Again, this is total crap!
>
> : > MacArthur was canned by Truman because Truman felt that MacArthur had sort
> : > of lost touch with reality. Making Truman wait for over an hour didn't
> : > help the situation. Merle Miller's book "Plain Speaking", a biography
> : > about Truman, explains the MacArthur firing in detail.
>
> : MacArthur had lost touch with reality by understanding much better than
> : Truman and his advisors just what was really at stake in Korea. Hence,
> : we're STILL patrolling the DMZ in 2004.
>
> I think you imply a better situation in Korea had McArthur stayed on. No
> proof of that.
>
> : >
> : > I wish you would do some " plain speaking" below!
>
>
> : /Everyone/ says that when they first begin to read Dennis's posts. Later
> : on they realize that he is.
>
> Whatever...
>
> Eric
>
> : > Eric
> : >
> : > : The media are extremely fearful that if a military can remove a
> : > : Fearless Leader duly Anointed by a Licensed Propa..., ah, News Media
> : > : Conglomerate, in /Hanoi/, for being a half-trained mutt who doesn't
> : > : know where the property lines are, the resulting knighthood are
> : > : likely to believe they can remove a half-trained mutt duly Anointed
> : > : by a Licensed Pro..., ah, News Media Conglomerate, from /Washington/
> : > : for not knowing where the property lines are.
> : >
> : > : > We weren't ATTEMPTING to destroy
> : > : > North Vietnam or it's army. We were attempting to keep it from invading
> : > : > and enslaving the South.
> : >
> : > : The Pyongyang Syndrome, aka "The DFC is largely a matter of
> : > : map-reading."
> : >
> : > : For those who arrived late, this referred to the fact that an F-86E
> : > : scrambled from Seoul in response to a MiG 17 incursion could close
> : > : on, but could not often catch, the MiG until it slowed to land ten
> : > : miles on the other side of the Yalu River.
> : > : For the really-late, that's ten miles inside China.
> : > : In the 'Nam, the award hung less often from the chests of pilots
> : > : than from five miles of Cambodian airspace.
> : > : For those still in bed, if you got the sucker on the other side of
> : > : the map squiggle, It Never Happened.
> : > : "Pass Interference, Offense, Illegal Quarterback On Field, Penalty
> : > : Declined; Replace Quarterback, Replace Ball, Repeat First Down."
> : > : >
>
>
> : ---
> : Art
>
> : "No; I have not been charged with that.
> : In fact, nobody has said that to me yet."
> : ---Lee Oswald
> : (1963)

Quantcast