which suggests something. As for Viet Nam, the war was not winnable by design. Like the Korean War before it, the goal was a stalemate rather than a victory. We fought a war of attrition against the Vietnamese. In Viet Nam, we came up against an enemy who was willing to absorb whatever losses we inflicted so long as they inflicted heavy losses in return. Ultimately, they fought a war of attrition against us and won.

A friend of mine was a contract pilot (read: mercenary) over there for 8 years. He says that LBJ was making millions and had no interest in the war ending. It seems LBJ owned a lot of stock in companies like Raymond Morris Knuteson Brown & Root, who just so happened to get a lot of lucrative contruction contracts in the region. I've talked to others who were there and many say the same thing. LBJ went to Congress as a man of modest means and left worth over $40 million. Pretty good on government pay, kind of like Marcos in the Philippines.

Now, on the issues of anti-war protests in general, if you're an opponent of the US, which do you think will give you encouragement to fight on, a protest against the war or for it? If the protests give our opponents encouragement, does that make war more or less likely? It really is that simple.