| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Mikey" |
| Date: |
08 Dec 2006 03:09:51 PM |
| Object: |
How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
Vietnam War:
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French
that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.
During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam
and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient
supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68
was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost
the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet
'68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to
negotiate a surrender.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War
was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they
heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV
proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They
were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been
overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there
were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained
access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of
America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA.
They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead,
they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month,
eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory
they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was
made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end
of 1967, beginning of 1968.
.
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
11 Dec 2006 07:00:07 AM |
|
|
For some reason I have not gotten even one updated message on any
usenet group since I sent this reply last Friday.
Curious.
If you're wondering why I'm sending so many reposts.
I expect to keep sending until I see my message show up on
alt.impeach.bush
Anyway, this message needs to be pounded into some mighty thick
warmongering heads.
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
13 Dec 2006 05:32:38 PM |
|
|
For some reason I have not gotten even one updated message on any
usenet group since I sent this reply last Friday.
Curious.
If you're wondering why I'm sending so many reposts.
I expect to keep sending until I see my message show up on
alt.impeach.bush
Anyway, this message needs to be pounded into some mighty thick
warmongering heads.
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
16 Dec 2006 06:18:05 PM |
|
|
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run the reply that crashed Usenet on Earthlink for 1 week |
16 Dec 2006 06:19:34 PM |
|
|
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marinus van der Lubbe" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
08 Dec 2006 05:13:06 PM |
|
|
Mikey wrote:
Vietnam War:
How sad. You are still fighting our last unjust war.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ed Moise" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
13 Dec 2006 06:20:33 PM |
|
|
Mikey wrote:
Vietnam War:
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French
that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.
During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam
and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient
supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
When somebody says that Giap wrote something "In his book" without
mentioning the title of the book, this is a clue that 1) the person in
question has never actually seen a book by Giap that contains that
statement; 2) the person in question has probably never read any book
by Giap; and 3) there is no book by Giap containing that statement.
In this case, there is no book by Giap in which he indicated that NVA
troops were without sufficient supplies, and had been continually
defeated time and again.
When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet
'68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to
negotiate a surrender.
There also isn't any book by Giap saying that.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War
was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat.
This is even more obviously false. The number of U.S. casualties
before the Tet Offensive was a lot more than 10,000.
And so on.
Mikey, if you want want to tell stories about things that appeared in
some imaginary book by Giap, you really should make up a title for that
imaginary book.
Ed Moise
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 11:49:15 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 21:09:51 GMT, "Mikey" <M@earthlink.net> wrote:
Vietnam War:
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French
that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.
During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam
and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient
supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68
was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost
the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet
'68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to
negotiate a surrender.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War
was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they
heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV
proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They
were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been
overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there
were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained
access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of
America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA.
They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead,
they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month,
eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory
they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was
made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end
of 1967, beginning of 1968.
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 12:35:13 PM |
|
|
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan, will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wally" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 11:50:18 PM |
|
|
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12nm0b19n7vl73@corp.supernews.com...
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
We don't know what ***** tastes like, and we don't want to know.
From: dana raffaniello (danaraffanie...@worldnet.att.net)
Subject: houston toilet for ladies
Newsgroups: alt.personals.fetish
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 1997/11/02
use me as your toilet. will be toilet for female parties. can also
be used
as a rug, so you can walk on me.
Search Result 307
From: dana raffaniello (danaraffanie...@worldnet.att.net)
Subject: ladies use my tongue for your pleasure
Newsgroups: houston.personals
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 1997/11/02
swm very oral will orally worship any female that wishes to be
worshipped.
will kiss and lick your feet and butt .
might be wiling to be your toilet paper if you are that aggressive.
From: dana raffaniello (danaraffanie...@worldnet.att.net)
Subject: will worship female butt and feet
Newsgroups: houston.personals
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 1997/11/02
swm will worship your feet and butt nothing but oral. use my tongue
and
mouth for your pleasure. no penetration unless wanted.
--------------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:Dana+author:Raffaniello&hl=e...
houston toilet for ladies
use me as your toilet. will be toilet for female parties.
can also be used as a rug, so you can walk on me.
alt.personals.fetish - 02 Nov 1997 by dana raffaniello - View Thread
(1 article)
ladies use my tongue for your pleasure
swm very oral will orally worship any female that wishes to be
worshipped. will kiss and lick your feet and
butt . might be wiling to be your toilet paper if you are that
aggressive.
houston.personals - 02 Nov 1997 by dana raffaniello - View Thread (1
article)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
10 Dec 2006 01:24:19 AM |
|
|
Dana wrote:
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan, will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
Idiot. Germany and Japan attacked us. Iraq did not.
RT
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marinus van der Lubbe" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 08:47:45 PM |
|
|
Dana wrote:
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan, will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
I see that you and Chimpboy base all of your geo-political decisions
around the game of Risk. But those plastic pieces in Iraq, they are not
really a base for anything other than recruiting more Al-Qaeda.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 09:00:17 PM |
|
|
"Marinus van der Lubbe" <mvdl@barcolounger.com> wrote in message
news:12nmtalst885015@corp.supernews.com...
Dana wrote:
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan, will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point
into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both
Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
I see that you and Chimpboy
Another leftist loser, with nothing to say but insults about Bush.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Fazemeier" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 11:20:43 PM |
|
|
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12nmttg607slu58@corp.supernews.com...
"Marinus van der Lubbe" <mvdl@barcolounger.com> wrote in message
news:12nmtalst885015@corp.supernews.com...
Dana wrote:
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan,
will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point
into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both
Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
I see that you and Chimpboy
Another leftist loser, with nothing to say but insults about Bush.
Yet you say nothing EVER.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Fazemeier" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
10 Dec 2006 01:32:16 AM |
|
|
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12nmttg607slu58@corp.supernews.com...
"Marinus van der Lubbe" <mvdl@barcolounger.com> wrote in message
news:12nmtalst885015@corp.supernews.com...
Dana wrote:
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan,
will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point
into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both
Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
I see that you and Chimpboy
Another leftist loser, with nothing to say but insults about Bush.
You can't refute his post so you snip it.
What a *****.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wally" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 11:57:54 PM |
|
|
"Dana" <raff242@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12nmttg607slu58@corp.supernews.com...
"Marinus van der Lubbe" <mvdl@barcolounger.com> wrote in message
news:12nmtalst885015@corp.supernews.com...
Dana wrote:
"Seethis Pass" <notanewguy@maxivision.com> wrote in message
news:8hsln25mjo8kuc3ijcuojeehp3eua5fhll@4ax.com...
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either,
And here you describe just how clueless those on the left really are.
Havin permanent pressence in Iraq, like we do in Germany and Japan,
will
serve Americas interests quite well. Besides being a launching point
into
Iran and Syria when needed. Having a pro western Islamic state in both
Iraq
and Afghanistan will keep Iran and other radical islamists locked up.
I see that you and Chimpboy
Another leftist loser, with nothing to say but insults about Bush.
Bush, and *****-eaters.
From: dana raffaniello (danaraffanie...@worldnet.att.net)
Subject: houston toilet for ladies
Newsgroups: alt.personals.fetish
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 1997/11/02
use me as your toilet. will be toilet for female parties. can also
be used
as a rug, so you can walk on me.
Search Result 307
From: dana raffaniello (danaraffanie...@worldnet.att.net)
Subject: ladies use my tongue for your pleasure
Newsgroups: houston.personals
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 1997/11/02
swm very oral will orally worship any female that wishes to be
worshipped.
will kiss and lick your feet and butt .
might be wiling to be your toilet paper if you are that aggressive.
From: dana raffaniello (danaraffanie...@worldnet.att.net)
Subject: will worship female butt and feet
Newsgroups: houston.personals
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 1997/11/02
swm will worship your feet and butt nothing but oral. use my tongue
and
mouth for your pleasure. no penetration unless wanted.
--------------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:Dana+author:Raffaniello&hl=e...
houston toilet for ladies
use me as your toilet. will be toilet for female parties.
can also be used as a rug, so you can walk on me.
alt.personals.fetish - 02 Nov 1997 by dana raffaniello - View Thread
(1 article)
ladies use my tongue for your pleasure
swm very oral will orally worship any female that wishes to be
worshipped. will kiss and lick your feet and
butt . might be wiling to be your toilet paper if you are that
aggressive.
houston.personals - 02 Nov 1997 by dana raffaniello - View Thread (1
article)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 11:54:57 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 21:09:51 GMT, "Mikey" <M@earthlink.net> wrote:
Vietnam War:
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French
that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.
During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam
and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient
supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68
was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost
the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet
'68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to
negotiate a surrender.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War
was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they
heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV
proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They
were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been
overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there
were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained
access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of
America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA.
They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead,
they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month,
eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory
they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was
made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end
of 1967, beginning of 1968.
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seethis Pass" |
|
| Title: Re: How Liberals Lose war & cut & Run |
09 Dec 2006 11:10:44 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 21:09:51 GMT, "Mikey" <M@earthlink.net> wrote:
Vietnam War:
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French
that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.
During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam
and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.
In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient
supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again.
By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68
was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost
the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet
'68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to
negotiate a surrender.
At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War
was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they
heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV
proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They
were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been
overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there
were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained
access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of
America.
According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA.
They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead,
they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month,
eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory
they knew they could not win on the battlefield. Remember, this decision was
made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end
of 1967, beginning of 1968.
If we had only stayed in Viet Nam from then to now we could have won,
uh,.... well, What?,
At what cost?
We never planned to win.
There was nothing to win.
The war was just about keeping the level of military spending up.
General Mc Nam era, ( get the name's significance as it pertained to
his input?), eventually admitted we should never have gone to Viet
Nam.
There's nothing for us to win in Iraq either, unless you think the
Iraqis will ever want to imitate us, the great American satan that
has preyed upon, terrorized and demonized them for the last 15 years.
There's no chance of that.
Anyone who participates in our 'vision' of how to proceed there is
killed as a collaborator with the enemy. That's us.
Our only excuse (?) for our inhumanity will be that we did it for
Israel.
We didn't do it for the Oil.
That could have been purchased much more cheaply.
It could have been replaced as our energy source of choice more
cheaply.
We didn't do it in order to get rid of our former friend and loyal
employee Hussein.
He was under our complete control except that he had killed all of our
spies at the time and was a threat to choose a different kind of money
to trade oil for.
Any oil producing state that chooses a different monetary instrument
to trade oil in, is a mortal threat to our economy.
If we can be defeated this easily I suggest that is a problem of our
own making which war will not repair.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
