[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

You published this link:

http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Forei...ning-to-say-no

This link directly contradicts one of your loudest barks: that we
would have "won" in Vietnam if only we had stayed longer.

Another report in the L.A. Times makes the erroneous assumption that
'Afghanistan does resemble Vietnam: Its central government is both
incompetent and deeply corrupt, and that could sink the war effort'.
There is a minor detail: the government in Hanoi was far from
incompetent, and it was the ingeniousness of the North Vietnamese
military command that defeated the American troops with their Tet
offensive. No one needs to argue here whether or not the U.S. ever won
anything in Vietnam. It did not.

So, 2pid, either you claim this link is correct, you deliberately
misrepresented its contents, or you were wrong when you claimed the
only reason we didn't prevail in Vietnam was because we pulled out
support.

Which is it, Oh Dim One?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 7, 11:12*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Sep 7, 12:16*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
You published this link:

http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Forei...y2009m9d6-Afgh...

This link directly contradicts one of your loudest barks: that we
would have "won" in Vietnam if only we had stayed longer.

Another report in the L.A. Times makes the erroneous assumption that
'Afghanistan does resemble Vietnam: Its central government is both
incompetent and deeply corrupt, and that could sink the war effort'.
There is a minor detail: the government in Hanoi was far from
incompetent, and it was the ingeniousness of the North Vietnamese
military command that defeated the American troops with their Tet
offensive.

* Defeated American troops with Tet?
* It's nonsense like that which casts doubt on your ability to serve.

I didn't write that, 2pid. It was in the cite *you* provided. LOL!

* Only defeat of American military Tet brought was from the mouth
of Walter Kronkite

http://www.ljcnet.com/tet_offensive.htm

*No one needs to argue here whether or not the U.S. ever won
anything in Vietnam. It did not.

*There is an arguement I heard from a former President of Singapore
who said that
the Vietnam war allowed countries like Singapore and the Phillipines
to establish fledgling democracies and hold off communist movements.

*I'm sure you don't have the capacity to evaluate that scenario.

Bark! Bark! Bark!

So, 2pid, either you claim this link is correct,

LoL. * Do you really insist that a link be 100% agreeable to
be used? * *

No, but "capable of rational thought" should be on the checklist
somewhere. I love how you attack me for what your own cite states.
LMAO!

I suppose for someone as easily confused with
such a short attention span as you, that would be helpful,
but it isn't practical.

I see. So the person you quoted was totally messed up and incapable of
rational thought except in the area you agreed with.

Why are you attacking me for the "poor thinking" you found in your own
cite? LOL!

[Bret L]

Winning or losing in Vietnam had little to do with how long we were
there and everything with whether we were serious or ****ing around
with "measured response".. An all out offensive would have taken all
of North Vietnam in thirty days.

Yeah, then we would have had to deal with China.

But back then we could have.

Every tactic we tried that worked-mining, Arc Light raids, ethane gas
in the tunnels-was immediately halted because Nixon was pusski and did
not go all the way. In fact when it was finally decided to "drag them
to the table" we mined Haiphong harbor and that brought immediate
results.

"Winning" in the long term, rather than military sense, would have
meant extirpating a good chunk of the population. But that happened
anyway-hundreds of thousands of people died or endured lengthy
imprisonment once we pulled out. In contrast we could have taken
Hanoi and probably had to shoot less than 30,000 hardcore defiants
summarily.

Poland was comfortably communist for 40+ years. That would have never
happened had not the Polish nation been effectively gelded at Katyn.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 7, 3:59*pm, Bret L wrote:
Winning or losing in Vietnam had little to do with how long we were
there and everything with whether we were serious or ****ing around
with "measured response".. An all out offensive would have taken all
of North Vietnam in thirty days.

*Yeah, then we would have had to deal with China.

But back then we could have.

*Every tactic we tried that worked-mining, Arc Light raids, ethane gas
in the tunnels-was immediately halted because Nixon was pusski and did
not go all the way. In fact when it was finally decided to "drag them
to the table" we mined Haiphong harbor and that brought immediate
results.

*"Winning" in the long term, rather than military sense, *would have
meant extirpating a good chunk of the population. But that happened
anyway-hundreds of thousands of people died or endured lengthy
imprisonment once we pulled out. *In contrast we could have taken
Hanoi and probably had to shoot less than 30,000 hardcore defiants
summarily.

*Poland was comfortably communist for 40+ years. That would have never
happened had not the Polish nation been effectively gelded at Katyn.

Sorry, Bratzi, but in 2pid's 'mind' we won the war in Vietnam. The
only reason it went communist was because we didn't stay long enough.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 7, 7:27*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Sep 7, 11:42*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Sep 7, 11:12*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 12:16*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
You published this link:

http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Forei...y2009m9d6-Afgh...

This link directly contradicts one of your loudest barks: that we
would have "won" in Vietnam if only we had stayed longer.

Another report in the L.A. Times makes the erroneous assumption that
'Afghanistan does resemble Vietnam: Its central government is both
incompetent and deeply corrupt, and that could sink the war effort'..
There is a minor detail: the government in Hanoi was far from
incompetent, and it was the ingeniousness of the North Vietnamese
military command that defeated the American troops with their Tet
offensive.

* Defeated American troops with Tet?
* It's nonsense like that which casts doubt on your ability to serve.

I didn't write that, 2pid. It was in the cite *you* provided. LOL!

*YOU quoted it. Or is that just shhhtards debating trade tripe?

Let me slow this down for the dull and unintelligent (you).

You quoted a cite to 'prove' one of your 'points'. I actually wasted
the time to read it, 2pid, in its entirety. Imagine my surprise when
the source you provided claimed that we'd lost the war and that we'd
never had a chance to win it!

So I brought this fact to your attention. What was your response?
Attacking the person you'd cited as someone who can't think, and
calling it "nonsense". (Of course, in your canine 'mind' you tried to
blame me for what your cited person had written.)

So what you've done is discredited your own source, 2pid. It was
written by a person who cannot think and has published "nonsense".
You're saying that if the person agrees with you they're right buy
otherwise they're full of "nonsense".

LMAO!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 8, 11:54*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Sep 7, 6:40*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Sep 7, 7:27*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 11:42*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 7, 11:12*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 12:16*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
You published this link:

http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Forei...y2009m9d6-Afgh...

This link directly contradicts one of your loudest barks: that we
would have "won" in Vietnam if only we had stayed longer.

Another report in the L.A. Times makes the erroneous assumption that
'Afghanistan does resemble Vietnam: Its central government is both
incompetent and deeply corrupt, and that could sink the war effort'.
There is a minor detail: the government in Hanoi was far from
incompetent, and it was the ingeniousness of the North Vietnamese
military command that defeated the American troops with their Tet
offensive.

* Defeated American troops with Tet?
* It's nonsense like that which casts doubt on your ability to serve.

I didn't write that, 2pid. It was in the cite *you* provided. LOL!

*YOU quoted it. Or is that just shhhtards debating trade tripe?

Let me slow this down for the dull and unintelligent (you).

You quoted a cite to 'prove' one of your 'points'.

*Which doesn't begin to imly I agree with everything on the
cite except to a dimwit like you.

I'm more interested in the fact that you quoted somebody who was so
totally wrong and yet in the very next breath so totally right.
"Nonsense!" LoL.

*I actually wasted
the time to read it, 2pid, in its entirety.

*And then quoted something you don't even agree with.

Isn't it amazing that somebody who can't think properly managed to hit
one out of the park when you agreed with them? LoL.

And again you try to attack me when it's your own source who stated
what you hate. LoL.

Imagine my surprise when
the source you provided claimed that we'd lost the war and that we'd
never had a chance to win it!

*Maybe he knew you were in the service.

I see. So I refer to the article and you turn it into an attack.

How 'civil' of you. LoL.

So I brought this fact to your attention. What was your response?
Attacking the person you'd cited

Wrong. I attacked you for quoting something so completely wrong
while claiming to be in military service.

So you advocate selective quoting. I already knew that but it's good
of uyou to admit your shortfall. LoL.

Of course, you lack any self awareness.

LMAO!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 8, 1:34*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Sep 8, 11:30*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Sep 8, 11:54*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 6:40*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 7, 7:27*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 11:42*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 7, 11:12*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 12:16*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
You published this link:

http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Forei...y2009m9d6-Afgh...

This link directly contradicts one of your loudest barks: that we
would have "won" in Vietnam if only we had stayed longer.

Another report in the L.A. Times makes the erroneous assumption that
'Afghanistan does resemble Vietnam: Its central government is both
incompetent and deeply corrupt, and that could sink the war effort'.
There is a minor detail: the government in Hanoi was far from
incompetent, and it was the ingeniousness of the North Vietnamese
military command that defeated the American troops with their Tet
offensive.

* Defeated American troops with Tet?
* It's nonsense like that which casts doubt on your ability to serve.

I didn't write that, 2pid. It was in the cite *you* provided. LOL!

*YOU quoted it. Or is that just shhhtards debating trade tripe?

Let me slow this down for the dull and unintelligent (you).

You quoted a cite to 'prove' one of your 'points'.

*Which doesn't begin to imly I agree with everything on the
cite except to a dimwit like you.

I'm more interested in the fact that you quoted somebody who was so
totally wrong and yet in the very next breath so totally right.
"Nonsense!" LoL.

*It happens. Even a blind dimwitted rodent like you finds a nut.

Cool! List some things the Dems have done right.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Sep 8, 8:54*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Sep 8, 12:34*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Sep 8, 1:34*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 8, 11:30*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 8, 11:54*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 6:40*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 7, 7:27*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 11:42*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Sep 7, 11:12*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Sep 7, 12:16*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
You published this link:

http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Forei...y2009m9d6-Afgh...

This link directly contradicts one of your loudest barks: that we
would have "won" in Vietnam if only we had stayed longer.