So when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, they lost because they were polite? Sure seemed to me, from what I read, that they went in full-force and brutally with very few constraints on their military. Didn't turn out so good for them as I recall.

Frank, when are you going to stop rewriting history? Brutality and unrestrained force is certainly a military tactic but only works politically in one condition - as a defensive tactic. World War II was an excellent example of this. The US took on Germany and Japan only after a clear strike went against us. The countries we went into to fight were ones that had been forcefully invaded by marauding armies.

I can't believe you still are under the impression that Vietnam was winnable. We as a country finished that debate a long time ago and the results were very clear. Do you somehow think that you can dredge up these misconceptions and distortions because you have a new and uneducated audience now?

Frank, you're in a fantasyland here. Wars like Iraq and Vietnam are and were complete and utter quagmires no matter how many resources and lives you put into them. Many of the military commanders you so revere and trust to make valid tactical decisions in conflict are the same ones that bought into Rumsfield's assertion that we could waltz into Iraq with a light force and suddenly the country would be secure.

Art