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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (177167)	10/27/2003 10:12:34 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575622

You obviously don't know what you are talking about. How many of your buddies did you lose over there, SOB?

To: Alighieri who wrote (177167)	10/28/2003 1:30:47 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575622

RE:"If you study the Vietman war, you will find that it was a bipartisan war in all respects. Nixon had five years to win it and couldn't." When we stopped bombing Hanoi we lost the war. It just took a while to play out. Hanoi Jane helped.

To: Alighieri who wrote (177167)	10/28/2003 9:12:56 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575622

The rest came under Nixon. If you study the Vietman war, you will find that it was a bipartisan war in all respects. Nixon had five years to win it and couldn't. The war was NOT bipartisan. It was lost by poor leadership long before Nixon took office. Nixon never had a chance to win the war, his only option was to withdraw. All wars may well be barbaric. But there are good reasons for some. I'm not sure whether we should have been there. But I know that once we were there we should have taken their heads off. Johnson was a poor leader, and as a result, 58,300 Americans lost their lives. To try to blame Nixon for it after the fact is not intellectually honest.