yes, i am not arguring you point, if as it appears bus
has no real plan, then history will repeat the vietnam
experence. but, if there is a plan, it still might
require the cohones to stay the course just as it was
in ww2. i don't see the plan here, but, i am for the
sodiers sake and the iraqi's sake too hoping that
there is a plan and i just don't see it.
   by the way, if given the same choice of magovern
and nixon, even knowing what i know, i'd vote for
nixon. yes, he did have it in his gut to get us out.

oh by the way too i was not kiding about your injury.
a well know neuro at emory told me that there was no
doubt that the stress on the job couses the spasms to
be worsened. i go to one of his deciples for botox
since the university of alabama medical center hired
him away to head their neuro dept. my next botox will
be friday morning, i hope. some times you can set
there for hours.

i carried judy to pt today. went to a 3 stories twin
winged medical professional complex. as is my norm, i
checked them out for accessability. their restrooms
were an abomanation. you wheelies could not get in and
if you did, it's be hard to make the tranfer from
chair to toilet. a medical complex for petes sake
should know how to do accessability.

--- "Cleveland, Kyle E." <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Indeed.  In fact, shortly before his death, Robert
> McNamara apologized for
> his (very large) part in the failure of the Vietnam
> War (as I'm sure you
> well know).  Arrogance on his part and LBJ's
> (another fine Texan...NOT!) put
> damn near 60,000 young men in the ground.  Sure, he
> apologized, and said
> that he knew the war was "wrong" as early as '65
> ("we were sinking in
> quicksand" were his thoughts at the time, or so he
> says in his '95 interview
> with Dianne Sawyer).  Nixon, for all his other
> nastiness, at least had the
> cajones to get us out--even if it did take until '73
> (or '75, depending on
> your point-of-view).  And yes, Hanoi Jane has
> unredeemed blood on her hands
> still, along with a bunch of "entertainers".  Same
> crap's still going on
> today out of the Hollywood elite, but would you
> expect anything different?
>
> Stll, Ken, the point is that we're losing men in
> drips and draps and the
> Administration had no game plan past the ouster of
> Baghdad.  In WWII,
> Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin were making post-war
> plans in '42!  The
> Marshall and MacArthur Plans were set up and ready
> to go long before the
> bombs stopped. In Vietnam, all we had was some vague
> idea that if we didn't
> stop Uncle Ho from taking over the South, all of
> Indo-China would fall to
> the Reds like dominoes.  Look at the guys we had
> "running" South
> Vietnam--Diem, a raving megalomaniac, was probably
> the best of the bunch!
>
> I think current American foriegn policy tends to be
> a lot like American
> culture:  We don't like the "long haul".  We're into
> instant gratification,
> whether it's making war or buying a car.  All the
> media, and probably the
> administration, can think about is how the Iraqi
> deal is going to play out
> in next year's election.  Our economic policies are
> focused on getting the
> economy in shape for the next quarter--not the next
> quarter century.
>
> General Giap, military commander of North Vietnam,
> knew that he could not
> beat the Americans in a conventional sense, but he
> knew that if he could
> just keep us off-balance long enough, we'd get bored
> and go home.  I think
> Sadaam and Bin Laden know the same thing:  If they
> can keep us just a few
> inches from outright victory, it won't be long
> before the American people
> will get tired and demand our troops return home.
> You point to the second
> World War.  Can you imagine what sort of uproar we'd
> have today if we were
> faced with a two-front war where the casualty
> figures were going to be, at
> least, in the hundreds of thousands?  The media is
> already fanning the
> flames of soldiers' and their families' discontent
> by reporting that they
> should've been home by now, and (perish the thought)
> they could be "in
> country" for as long as a year!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ken barber [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 3:02 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: History redux; was RE: Quiz About 9/11
>
>
>   again your history is fine as far as it goes, but
> go
> back to the big one too.
>   what made nam turn out like it was probably was
> the
> lack of a desire to win that was there in ww2 for
> the
> politicos.
>    just a bit about nam, should not have been there,
> but, we were and i'd still hang the people who aided
> the enemy, i will name names starting with the
> pretty
> neck of hanoi jane being streched.
>    i have neither forgot nor forgiven.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com