How to Lose a War

"We have fought many wars for the purposes of liberating the oppressed, independence, retaliation for unprovoked acts of terror, and for the purposes of international security."

First we liberated the Indian People, then the Cubans, the Philipinos, the Puerto Ricans, the Hawaians (sp?). . . .

 

Then the Jews, then the French, and most of Europe, then the Russians, then the Afganis, then the Iraqis...

If you are gonna make a statement about history, at least tell the whole story.

Joseph Botwinick

 

"He was my commander in chief when I was in the Air Force. He stood up to Kruschev and Castro. He lowered taxes, but most of all

He died for his country."-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good points, but he had his failures too, like the bay of pigs. I was under the impression that he won by a small margin, did a clear majority of Americans want to follow him? Didn't he win only because Sam Giencna the moffia boss bought West Virgina for him?

 

Bunyon,

Every president has their failures.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Now Joseph, that does not really say anything. Both Reagan and Carter had their failures, but you would not put them in the same class would you? The way I have always heared it (I was not around at the time), if he had not been assasenated, he would be remembered as a medicore president.

 

There is no honest comparison between Jimmy Carter (the worst president in a long time) and John F. Kennedy (who was, even by your own reporting, at worse a mediocre president). Kennedy did cut taxes, and that is something Carter never would have done.

So, why do you hate Kennedy? Is it because he is a Democrat, a Kennedy, a Catholic, or is it all three?

Joseph Botwinick

 

-------------------
Actually billwald, A brief study of warfare will show that any assets siezed by the U.S. Armed Forces ( transportation, sea ports, airports,) were returned to the occupied country voluntarily, ( or otherwise as in Vietnam), in much better shape than which they were captured.
This was usually accomplished by using the foreign assets available (as in Japan and Germany),to run the darn things, (railroads, airports, toll booths), rather than disolving the entire infrastucture, and using crack Airborne and Marine units as caretakers.

To reword your post if I might take the liberty, the missions of the U.S. Armed froces are to :
Kill the enemy and take the high ground.
Establish air superiority and protect all air traffic lanes
Establish sea superiority and protect the sea lanes.
THEY DID THAT.
After that it is up to the politicians.

 

Joseph, I am going to ask you to go back and admit a couple of things. 1) I did not compare Carter and Kennedy 2) I have expressed no hate toward Kennedy.

 

1. What was the point of even bringing up Carter then?

2. I am not quite so sure I can admit that. You seem to be looking for a reason to criticize him unfairly. You won't even give him credit or acknowledge the good things he did do. That seems to indicate some level of hatred in my eyes.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Joseph, it was just a glich. You're looking for demons under rocks in Brother Bunyon's post.

 

I just did not think he was that great of a president even though he had his moments. So I was just courious as to why some folks felt so positivly about him. I was not around at the time so it is just history to me. I can't say I have ever experienced hate toward anyone who I have read about in the history book. I don't even experience hate when I read about Hitler.

My point was that I am sure you would not put Carter and Reagan in the same class, yet the both "had their failures". I was making the point that your sentence did not really modify anything.

Finally, I don't see any criticism that I may have brought up that is not brought up in the common dialouge on Kennedy, so I am not sure how you would think I was unfairly criticizing him. I just did not expect that folks here would have that High of an opinion about him and was intrigued enough to ask questions.

 

Yes, a small margin. His biggest problem was that he was Catholic and second that he was so young (people were ambivalent about this).

His biggest assets were his charisma, sense of humor, the fact that he was a war hero, a "Kennedy" and a man with a growing family (quite a change from Roosevelt, Truman and Ike).

Once he got into office people of every political shade immediately fell in love with him and his beautiful family.

While he publicly acknowledged that he was a liberal, by today's standards he would be considered a moderate conservative.

Uh, I don't know.

He died serving his nation at the hands of an assassin.
A very small and special band of presidents.

I was in my barracks (we had rooms) at Griffiss Air Force Base NY when the news came over the wire.

People everywhere were weeping openly.
I still cloud up when I think about that day.

BTW, I understand that he is history to you.
Yes, he had his faults, more than we were aware of in those days.
He was protected by the press it seems.

HankD

 

Opening post: //QUIT. It's that simple. There
are plenty of more complex ways to lose
a war, but none as reliable as just giving up. //

Yep. It is that simple.
In 2005 our troops in Germany
celebrated the 60th anniversery
of the occupation of Germany;
our troops in Japan celebrated the
60th anniversery of the occupation
of Japan. We have no troops in
Vietnam to celebrate.

When will folks figure out IF YOU WIN YOU
STAY; if you bug out, you loose?

Even yet, it is NOT TOO LATE to
snatch defeat from the very jaws
of Victory in Iraq.

 

Gosh, that's helpful.

I would think the best policy would have been to have required the UN to actually enforce their sanctions 14 years ago. But, that is just me.

 

Typical Joseph.