For RandFan

[Wayne Grabert]

RandFan, since you have doubted my contention that the Vietnam War was unwinnable, I thought that you might be interested in what Robert McNamara had to say, as mentioned here. (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=1317&ncid=742&e=11&u=/030221/228/3bmqw.html) Years from now, as he confronts his mortality, Powell may be tempted to come clean, as Robert McNamara did with his 1995 political memoirs, "In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam." McNamara, who was defense secretary from 1961 to 1968, admitted that he and other high-level officials had concluded years before the Vietnam war ended that it was probably unwinnable. However, they never said so publicly.

(snip)

By the time McNamara got around to admitting the obvious, it was too late. The damage was already done.

[Doctor X]

No conflict is may be won if the participants feel it cannot.

The question really was whether or not Vietnam was worth winning.

--J.D.

[Advocate]

Originally posted by Doctor X
No conflict is may be won if the participants feel it cannot.

The question really was whether or not Vietnam was worth winning.

--J.D.

I'm not sure I understand your question. Surely if it was worth fighting at all it was worth winning. The questions as I see them are was it possible to win? and was it worth fighting at all?