On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 09:06:04 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

On Saturday, 12 November 2016 13:00:40 UTC-4, Califbill wrote:
True North wrote:
Poquito Loco
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 20:57:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

This cartoon says it pretty well:
http://townhall.com/political-cartoo...6/11/09/146283

"LOL! Boy, does that bring back memories!"


Sure dose! What did y'all call it.. "cut and run"?


Dip****. Was the decision on the politicians and public. After the Tet
Offensive the VC were basically done. Maybe you should study a little
history, instead of spending all your energy on snide remarks.


The North Viet Nam Army didn't look "basically done" when they rolled down that highway before they were supposed to and chased y'all out. Big Deal..you may have bested a few semi military types running around in bare feet but once the real army showed up...YOU were "basically done".

There was a problem with the political will to actually take and hold
ground. The US never lost a battle. They just kept fighting the same
one for the same dirt over and over again. It would have taken more
soldiers than we were willing to commit to actually win that war and
as soon as that was apparent, we should have got the hell out of there
.... or not gone at all, Thanks JFK/LBJ for killing 60,000 guys for
nothing.
We still have not learned that lesson because we are doing it again in
the middle east and South Asia. Let these monkeys kill each other and
stay out of it. Terrorism is an issue for us because all of our bombs
have a return address on them.

On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 09:06:04 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

On Saturday, 12 November 2016 13:00:40 UTC-4, Califbill wrote:
True North wrote:
Poquito Loco
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 20:57:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

This cartoon says it pretty well:
http://townhall.com/political-cartoo...6/11/09/146283

"LOL! Boy, does that bring back memories!"


Sure dose! What did y'all call it.. "cut and run"?


Dip****. Was the decision on the politicians and public. After the Tet
Offensive the VC were basically done. Maybe you should study a little
history, instead of spending all your energy on snide remarks.


The North Viet Nam Army didn't look "basically done" when they rolled down that highway before they were supposed to and chased y'all out. Big Deal..you may have bested a few semi military types running around in bare feet but once the real army showed up...YOU were "basically done".

Don, you are really showing just how little you know about the Vietnam war.

On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 12:50:31 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 09:06:04 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

On Saturday, 12 November 2016 13:00:40 UTC-4, Califbill wrote:
True North wrote:
Poquito Loco
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 20:57:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

This cartoon says it pretty well:
http://townhall.com/political-cartoo...6/11/09/146283

"LOL! Boy, does that bring back memories!"


Sure dose! What did y'all call it.. "cut and run"?


Dip****. Was the decision on the politicians and public. After the Tet
Offensive the VC were basically done. Maybe you should study a little
history, instead of spending all your energy on snide remarks.


The North Viet Nam Army didn't look "basically done" when they rolled down that highway before they were supposed to and chased y'all out. Big Deal..you may have bested a few semi military types running around in bare feet but once the real army showed up...YOU were "basically done".

There was a problem with the political will to actually take and hold
ground. The US never lost a battle. They just kept fighting the same
one for the same dirt over and over again. It would have taken more
soldiers than we were willing to commit to actually win that war and
as soon as that was apparent, we should have got the hell out of there
... or not gone at all, Thanks JFK/LBJ for killing 60,000 guys for
nothing.
We still have not learned that lesson because we are doing it again in
the middle east and South Asia. Let these monkeys kill each other and
stay out of it. Terrorism is an issue for us because all of our bombs
have a return address on them.

Nicely said, but a waste of time on an individual whose head is still implanted...

The John flushes his head...

"Don, you are really showing just how little you know about the Vietnam war."


Maybe, but in the early to mid 70's cable tv had arrived and we got a lot of our war news from your big 3 networks.

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 07:02:50 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Maybe, but in the early to mid 70's cable tv had arrived and we got a lot of our war news from your big 3 networks.

That explains a lot. TV is just a mix of opinion and propaganda. I
molded a lot of my opinion talking to vets who were there, some as
early as 1963-4. (one Army Green Beret, one a Force Recon Marine)
My roomie and childhood friend was Recon 2 tours 66-68. When he came
home after Tet, it was clear this was not going to come out well.

On 11/13/16 10:42 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 07:02:50 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Maybe, but in the early to mid 70's cable tv had arrived and we got a lot of our war news from your big 3 networks.

That explains a lot. TV is just a mix of opinion and propaganda.

Well, that explains a lot about you.

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 07:02:50 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

The John flushes his head...

"Don, you are really showing just how little you know about the Vietnam war."


Maybe, but in the early to mid 70's cable tv had arrived and we got a lot of our war news from your big 3 networks.

No maybe about it. You're clueless. The big three networks all said Hillary was going to win the
election also.

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 10:59:24 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 11/13/16 10:42 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 07:02:50 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Maybe, but in the early to mid 70's cable tv had arrived and we got a lot of our war news from your big 3 networks.

That explains a lot. TV is just a mix of opinion and propaganda.

Well, that explains a lot about you.

Bitterness, Krause?

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 10:59:24 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

big 3 networks.

That explains a lot. TV is just a mix of opinion and propaganda.

Well, that explains a lot about you.

What? That I am paying attention?

There is not enough hard news on TV to fill an hour of time and we
have several "all news all the time" networks so it has to be a lot of
opinion. I suppose most of it spins left so you think it is fact but
I doubt you disagree that fox is mostly opinion. The rest of us feel
the same about MSNBC/NBC. When the VP of their controlling corporation
is a DNC apparatchik, why would you expect anything less?

On 11/13/16 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 10:59:24 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

big 3 networks.

That explains a lot. TV is just a mix of opinion and propaganda.

Well, that explains a lot about you.

What? That I am paying attention?

There is not enough hard news on TV to fill an hour of time and we
have several "all news all the time" networks so it has to be a lot of
opinion. I suppose most of it spins left so you think it is fact but
I doubt you disagree that fox is mostly opinion. The rest of us feel
the same about MSNBC/NBC. When the VP of their controlling corporation
is a DNC apparatchik, why would you expect anything less?



I watch the PBS NewsHour and the BBC World News America and sometimes in
the evening MSNBC. Perhaps you should consider expanding your news
horizons.