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.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (12087)	8/23/1998 9:54:00 PM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

Admiral U.S. Grant Sharpe, the former commander in the Pacific theater, wrote Strategy for Defeat back around 1966 warning of the danger in the aimless policy that was being pursued by LBJ and MacNamara. The military had tried to tell Johnson that the best use of American assets would have been to establish a no-man's land between North and South Viet Nam using air and sea power, preventing the North from sending substantial numbers of troops into the South, and to let South Viet Nam deal with the NVA that did get through. If we were going to commit U.S. troops then we should have done what we do best: an overwhelming sea invasion with Hanoi as the target. There were only two important cities in North Viet Nam, Hanoi and Haiphong. How long would it take to capture Hanoi if that was the goal? We captured Berlin in less time, for God's sake. The worst thing you can do is to commit troops piecemeal, to start and stop offensive operations, to let the enemy pick the site of battles, and to have only as many riflemen in the field as your enemy does. Guess which choice our political leadership decided upon?