On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 17:47:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/16/2017 5:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 13:15:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Why would we send our kids into a war we had no plans of winning?



Ask Truman and LBJ.

Both Bushs learned the lessons of Vietnam. Once a decision was made to
wage a war, it was done so in a manner to win. Harry will yak about
third rate armies, but a Russian tank is a tank regardless and Saddam
had a bunch of them.

Both excursions into Iraq weren't even close in terms of "not winning".

The problem in Iraq is we did not know what a win looked like. We beat
the army and hanged Saddam but nobody asked "what's next"?


Yes, yes, yes Greg. That point has been made a gazillion times.
The issue and point was that when allowed to "win" a battle or war the
US military can do an outstanding job. What came after was not (and is
not) the job of the military.

We did an outstanding job winning battles in Vietnam and how did that
work out? I have no doubt we have the best trained, best equipped and
most motivated military in the world, We will win any extended battle
we get in but without the political will to win the war and a plan for
the peace, we should just stay home.
We have had that problem since we nuked Japan and we should solve that
problem before we fight again. Simply projecting power into a conflict
that we are not prepared to win is simply stupid.