Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (19451)	7/26/2001 10:32:26 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

As a nation, we were not willing to commit the resources, or pursue the strategy, necessary to turn the situation around....... If we assume the goal of the war to have been the military defeat of the opposing forces, a greater commitment of resources or the pursuit of a different strategy might have turned the trick. This was not, unfortunately, the purpose. Our purpose was to install a government in S. Vietnam that could survive without us; the greatest factor constraining this purpose was not the strength of the forces opposing the governments we tried to install, but the fragility and ineptness of those governments. The opposition could afford to fight a war of attrition because they knew that they didn't have to win. They only had to survive, knowing that we would sooner or later leave, and that even with a massively degraded force they would still be able to topple whatever government we left behind. I'm not sure that any strategy or commitment of resources could have transformed the governments we backed in S. Vietnam into anything capable of functioning in our absence.