We didn’t lose because the Vietnamese, Russians, or Afghan insurgents. We lost because of Democrats. That’s about it.

True that. However, with just a bit more desire to actually win and a better understanding of the situation on the ground in Hanoi, Nixon could have won the war. I know, Monday Morning Quarterbacking is easy with 20/20 hindsight. But there is a lesson there that should be learned by anyone who is in a military leadership role. As John Negroponte caustically opined, “We bombed the North Vietnamese into accepting our concessions.” Yes, and something to avoid if at all possible.

Get your popcorn ready.

Exactly correct.

JJ,

“My prediction is that by January we will have a “Mubarak II” government in charge or else the entire ME will be aflame. I can also predict that the Obama administration is not game planning for either eventuality.”

Excellently stated and I concur.

It’s important to mention that Nixon’s institution of Operation Linebacker II in 1972 was NOT to win the war. Nixon and his administration had fully accepted the view that given the mood of the American public, unknowingly shaped and influenced by the media (Cronkite, etc.)…that the war was unwinnable.

Nixon’s sole purpose in instituting Operation Linebacker II was to force the N. Vietnamese to the peace table. Nixon sought an ‘honorable’ retreat and disengagement.

Such is the nature of evil and its ease of use.

Yes, yes, it certainly does. Here’s what happened when the U.S. instituted Operation Linebacker II in 1972. From wiki:
“Both the Soviet Union and China denounced the bombing, while some Western countries also criticized the US operation. In a famous speech, Olaf Palme, the Prime Minister of Sweden, compared the bombings to a number of historical “crimes” including the bombing of Guernica, the massacres of Oradour-sur-Glane, Babi Yar, Katyn, Lidice and Sharpeville, and the extermination of Jews and other groups at Treblinka, and said that “now another name can be added to this list: Hanoi, Christmas 1972”. His protests resulted in that the U.S. withdrew their ambassador from Sweden and told Sweden to not send a new ambassador to Washington.[90][91] In America, Nixon was criticized as a “madman”, and some of the people who supported Operation Linebacker I questioned the necessity and unusual intensity of Operation Linebacker II.[92]”

No matter what happens when the “world is watching” there will be critics. Especially if there are Muslims or communists getting their butts kicked.

If the Egyptian Army can be brutal enough and effective enough, the MB will quickly realize they can’t win in the streets and must revert to their old tactics of subversion and terrorism. My prediction is that by January we will have a “Mubarak II” government in charge or else the entire ME will be aflame. I can also predict that the Obama administration is not game planning for either eventuality.

Geoffrey Britain Says:
August 15th, 2013 at 7:57 pm

The only way the army stays in charge is if they are ruthless towards the Brotherhood because it’s certain that the Brotherhood will be and is ruthless towards its enemies.

I said previously (at another site, I think) that the anti-Muslim Brotherhood forces are going to have to be even more cold-blooded and ruthless than the radical Muslims in order to prevail over them, which is a tall order indeed.

So yes, there needs to be a wholesale slaughter of the Brotherhood, with no mercy and no quarter.

And good job with the Donald Sensing link. I read it earlier today, and was planning to link it in the other thread, but got lazy. I will do so forthwith.

“socialism, the nanny state, whatever we might call it, is doomed to fail because we can never know enough to manage everyone’s life for him or her.” Michael Adams

The far left certainly wants power and control but the nanny state only extends as far as its needed. When the nanny state finally runs out of other people’s money, it settles for equality of misery among the plebs. Should any of the plebs protest against the elite’s privileges, the steel fist is unleashed.

rickl,
Obama intends to do far more than utterly isolate the United States in the world. This is a partial insight into Obama’s mind-set and intentions; “Why the law does not matter to Obama”

“so with President Obama and federal courts’ rulings: they have no means of enforcing their rulings. As any intemperate two-year old knows, you can do anything you want until someone compels you to stop. And so Obama can order whatever he wishes until he is compelled to stop.

The courts lack the means of such compulsion. That leaves the Congress to rein in the executive. (Please excuse me while I erupt in peals of derisive laughter.) Congress’s only authority to rein in a president consists of two things: Withhold funding for departments and agencies under executive authority, or Impeach him.

Since those are the only two options available, and since the Congress is controlled by the Democrats (the Republican majority in the House meaning nothing here), neither loss of funding nor impeachment will ever be used to restrain this president.

The goal of the entire Democrat party is to be the permanent, sole political authority in the country. This is the actual transformation that Barack Obama promised to great applause in his 2008 campaign.

Obama can do this not because the Constitution or law authorize it. Most definitely they actually prohibit it. He is getting away with it because there is no one who can stop him and almost no one who wants to stop him. No one, and I mean absolutely no one, in the Democrat party is in the slightest interested in reining in Obama’s expansion of executive diktat because they know what few of the rest of us are awakening to: the Democrats are never going to lose that executive authority again. Let me be clear, with a promise to elucidate another day: there is never going to be another Republican president. Ever.

The media will not examine Obama’s imperialist manner because they do not want to. They agree with it. The courts are literally unable to enforce their rulings contra this administration; Obama ignores them at will and without consequence. The Republicans are dominated by the Political Class and lack the numbers, influence, collective will and ideological conviction to rein in the administration even if they had the ability to do so, which they don’t.

This is a president who knows that he does not need to make anyone “happy,” that there in fact is no political base that must be appeased or pleased – where else will the base go? The president of the United States is now quite literally a dictate-er: he orders what he wishes and implements what he chooses.

There is no check or balance any longer, not even the Congress’s power to control the federal purse. There is no federal purse to control. There are only years-long series of continuing resolutions and special appropriations, all funded with trillions of dollars of borrowed fiat money that no creditor anywhere in the world expects will be repaid. President Obama has a government credit card with no debt limit. The power to spend is the power to control, and that is what he is doing.”

Obama means to entrench the process of fundamental transformation of America into AmeriKa both domestic and foreign, such that it cannot be undone. That is the legacy he seeks.