Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 15:11:33 -0700, "Leadfoot"
wrote:

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:06:15 -0700, "Leadfoot"
wrote:

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:48:08 -0700, "Leadfoot"
wrote:

Have you ever worked at a job where you had to clean up someone else's
mess?
Someone who was paid by the same people as you to do it themselves?
Since your point is political, can you point out any--repeat
ANY--administration that left office with nothing to clean up for the
next administration? And, who precisely determines what is a mess? Has
the economy recovered from the impact of 9/11? How is unemployment?
What about inflation and interest rates? Did Truman, Eisenhower,
Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter finish up the Soviet mess? Get
the picture?
This is a mess that if it is possible to be cleaned up it can be cleaned
up
the end of Bush's term. Either the plan that is in place can be completed
by the Iraqi's with Bush's help by 1-19-09 or they won't be able to
accomplish it at all

Just how long were you prepared to fight in Vietnam, Ed? How many coups
did
South Vietanam have?
We were prepared to fight as long as it took, IF--repeat IF--the
give-up rather than fight crowd in the US would have stopped
distracting the politicians so that we could have won.
So we could still be there today, eh?

No, we would have been out by 1968. Review the effect on
"negotiations" of the period 18-29 December 1972 for a concrete
example.

Ed, with all due respect the "dolchstoss" theory didn't wash then and it
doesn't wash now. For whatever reason our proxies , the south Vietnamese
, would not fight with the same intensity as the Russian and Chinese
proxies, the north Vietnamese. Since both sides had nuclear weapons we
were constrained to fight a limited war. As a result "we" could not
win. Only the south Vietnamese could win and they did not want to fight.

This was obvious to the world in the late 60s.

Vince

Vince