We could have won the Vietnam War if we didn't have a vasculating military strategy, a corrupt South Vietnamese government, bad personnel policies, and micromanagement from the White House. We also could have won the Vietnam War if we bombed North Vietnam extensively from the gitgo, mined the Hai-Pong harbor, and launched an all out offensive on North Vietnam.

In fact, had we expanded the Korean War into the Chinese mainland like General MacArthtur suggested after the Chinese entered the Korean War, China would be another Japan today and there would have been no Vietnam War.

It's always the "could haves", "would haves" and "if we only hads" that makes you lose a war. I mean ... if pigs could fly ... who knows how the world would look like?

I have to remind you that North Vietnam was alltogether bombed three times the amount of bombs that were dropped in WW2. It was rather intresting document actually, where this was included.

We had won.....The troops were pulled by Congress after a cease fire was declared. The North attacked again shortly after we pulled out...Congress refused to spend any more money or abide by agreements that were made to S.Vietnam for support (weapons and such). If we it was deemed as a lost, it was due to political bullshit, not because of the troops or will.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

IT IS TIME for Americans to take back the country and start a new government.

two words: oil embargo.

after the US had depleted its reserves, pretty much everything would grind to a halt - the military, the economy, transportation, etc.

And the Canucks got you by the balls when it comes to that.

__________________
January the 20th 2009. The day I started to respect America!

Not really because if the world ever did work together to embargo the US from oil we would simply cross the northern and southern borders and take what we need. Remember this is only after the rest of the world has already acted agressively. If that wasn't enough we could and would take Venezuelen fields as well. At the same time a few well placed tactical very dirty nukes in the middle east, North Sea, and Russia near the major oil fields would essentially cut the rest of the worlds oil signficantly.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

We have oil....I believe the U.S. has a large oil supply but knew that the day would come when oil would get scarce so they have decided to save ours and use up all the others first....Just my opinion and would be something I'd think of doing.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

IT IS TIME for Americans to take back the country and start a new government.

my understanding is that this is absolutely correct.

Yet another conspiracy theory.

God they are tiresome, as much as I would like this one
to be true.

As a matter of fact the US does have a vast amount of
potential oil. I have seen estimates ranging up to 1.5 billion
barrels (world crude oil reserves are now about 1.2 billion)

The trouble is it is contained in rock: commonly called "oil shale".
Perhaps two thirds of all known potential recoverable oil is contained
in this widespread mineral. Extraction and refining processes are not
developed because it would unprofitable unless crude oil prices go over
$75 per barrel and stay there. OPEC will be able to undercut oil shale
by keeping their prices below $75 per barel for the forseeable future.
Still it's nice to know the stuff is there.

Canada also has about 1.8 billion barrels of oil in tar sands. It faces
technical and marketing problems just as oil shale .

__________________
From the fury of the Northmen, Good Lord, deliver us.

This topic is stupid. But this is very funny because you think your 300 millions people can win against about 6 billions people ? Are you sure ? I mean, take just Europe, If Europe attacks you , I'm sorry to tell you that but you can't win and it still remains China, Russia and Asia, Africa and South America . the only way for you is the nuclear option, but you are not the only one to have that and russia have more nuclear capabalities than you. So it means, you will lose. No need to make speechs about that, all the war had been won by the people who were the most many for a long long time. Economy doesn't count.

Shall we play a game?
http://moviesoundscentral.com/sounds/playgames.wav

David: How about Global Thermonuclear War?
WOPR: Wouldn't you prefer a good game of chess?

http://datacore.sciflicks.com/wargam...uclear_war.wav


























Strange game. The only winning move is not to play.

War Games. 1983

__________________
843rd Bomb Wing - Strategic Air Command
"Peace is our Profession"

"Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine. . . . Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants.
" - James Wilson, U. S. Supreme Court Justice and Signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution

It has been a constant of miltary history from the beginning
that an offence must have about a 4-1 advantage in order
to prevail against a properly conducted defence, so the US,
if it made no major mistakes, should always be able to withstand
an attack by all of Europe, including Russia.

God I hope the future is not disfigured by anything remotely
resembling such events.




I agree if any one of these were to attain fully modern development
then that would likely tip the scales even against the the best possible
US defence. Any two of them would be even worse for the US




The discussion above applies only to a nuclear free war.
With a nuclear option the US could easily attain the strength
to inflict unacceptible damage on any combination of enemies,
and so the Cold War Mutual Assured Destruction would be
revived as a deterrent.




This is not accurate. Economic and attendant technical development
are absolutely vital. The rest of the world would not NOW be able to
defeat a defensively positioned US. The underdeveloped areas would
first have to improve economically and technically far beyond what
they are now are.

__________________
From the fury of the Northmen, Good Lord, deliver us.

Those 6-billion people would have to get into our nation first and with 300 million people with numerous guns "plus" our military, I just can't see it happening.

Hell, we'll just activate the H.A.R.P. system and generate a monster hurricane to sink any ships in the ocean and then turn on the S.T.A.R. wars defense system to take out all nuke plants and oil refineries around the world.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

IT IS TIME for Americans to take back the country and start a new government.

And speaking of guns, I just picked up my new Browning A-bolt in 308.
Cost me $15.00, 10 for the raffle ticket and 5 for the background check.
First Browning I've ever owned, can't wait to try it out tomorrow.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

IT IS TIME for Americans to take back the country and start a new government.