"yes"
question: Does this mean everything will be OK now?

douglas "dartboard" lute will be the diversion that bush and the republican party needs to side-step responsibility for this morass which is iraq.

dickandbush will heed his counsel about like they did that of another seasoned general, colin powell

__________________
“Mayor Palin fails to have a firm grasp of something very simple: the truth.”

[Frontiersman editorial, 2/7/97]

Well, our drug czars certainly helped take illegal drugs off the street. And our health czars certainly ended the obesity problem in the country. So this should work, too. If only they thought of that 5 years ago the war would be over by now.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

As I have contented for a long time. Bush's "plan" for Iraq is to leave office with all the troops still over there.
Then whatever happens, if we "win", they(Bush will never come out and say, others will say it for him) will say it was Bush's stick-to-it-ness that "won".

But, the most likely outcome, when we are forced to leave. And it is perceived to be a "loss". They can blame the next President, no matter what they do or are able to do, it is their fault.

That is the Bush Plan for Iraq.

Oh, to the OP, this guy will just give them "more time" to see how things work. Thus pushing the ultimate decision closer to the 2008 election, just like the Sept report on the surge.

Judging from Public opinion and sentiment, no matter if we win this war or not, I think the public will still blame Bush. As for the new guy if he's going to kiss it and make it better, I'm going to opt out of the war from this point on. This war is such a complicated, integral thing, only a few people REALLY know what's going on and those people are in the group of people that are directly involved. I'm no longer a soldier. I can't offer a projection of reality of the war. I can only give an educated guess knowing war and what Info I can get my hands on which is not much. However, I will always support this war and I will always support our God Blessed Soldiers on that hill, in that convoy and on that roof.

__________________
I'll never Forget. To pull You Closer is to Pull You Down. Ignorence can be an envy. Applaud us as the old American Power goes quietly into the night.

who is to blame for the result of the viet nam war?

__________________
“Mayor Palin fails to have a firm grasp of something very simple: the truth.”

[Frontiersman editorial, 2/7/97]

Vietnam wasn't even a war, it was a campaign against communism, meaning it was a part of the larger Cold war. What happened in Vietnam was America decided to turn it into a full scale war without realizing what the road to victory really was and how it had to be gently juggled with the public. Vietnam was such a backward country, we knew from the beginning we could not leave and rely on them to repel communism. That's why we were there. We did not however appreciate the actual backwardness of the country and the length of time it would take to bring it up to speed with the rest of the advanced world. The intellect of the people was so rudimentary and stupid, they did not and could not collectively understand the importance
of self government. The process of developing the country and its people while repelling communist attacks took so long, the american public no longer thought the mission was worth the sacrifice, which it wasn't. The COld war called for a non-conventional means to defeat communism, which we did by using the understood superiority of capitalism to compete against Russia with. Communism cannot compete against Capitalism. Communism is BS economic crap where the economy doesn't work, the government doesn't work and the people are slaves. We broke their face with a wad of money between our fingers. This war is far different than any war this country has ever seen but I believe it can be won by conventional means and it is a noble cause, worthy of sacrfice. However, I fear 200,000 soldiers in the field is not enough no matter how much money we've spent on missile, tank and sub upgrades.

__________________
I'll never Forget. To pull You Closer is to Pull You Down. Ignorence can be an envy. Applaud us as the old American Power goes quietly into the night.

Now Bush has someone to blame for future problems.

We got rid of a Dictator and appoint a war czar.....dumb dumb dumb.

By coming up with a so-called war czar, Bush will probably be able to have something to add to troop orders without having the joint chiefs be a part of the conversation.

Soldiers are worth supporting and wars are as well as long as the premise for the war is justifiable. Have we truly seen enough evidence to focus so much of our attention on Iraq and less on the other parts of the war on terror that started before Iraq?[/i]

This is off-topic but I had to chime in on this because I find these comments insulting. You completely degrade the Vietnamese people and absolve America of any real blame without a shred of sarcasm or irony. America went into Vietnam and somehow the reason they lost is because of...'the stupidity and backwardness of the Vietnamese people?' At least if you made a joke about it you would have seemed like less of an ass. But you drum out your analysis of what happened with a complete straight face. America did not understand the terrain, the culture, or the real usefulness of actually going into that war over Communism and some how you manage to blame it all on the Vietnamese. That is beautiful. Call it what you want, but what you call a 'campaign' lasted 16 years and took the lives of 58,000 US troops and up to 5 million Vietnamese.

The Vietnamese had just come out of the French Indochina War. They fought long and hard to get the French off their land. I think if anybody understood the importance of self government it was the North Vietnamese because some of the people who fought off the french for independence became the ones who were fighting the Americans. The war was never about communism or capitalism to the Vietnamese. The communists easily turned it into a war about occupation. To them, what was the difference between the French colonists and the Americans trying to help establish a capitalist government? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. America completely underestimated the amount of support the North would get and their willingness to die in huge numbers to accomplish their objectives. What you call an appreciation for the backwardness and stupidity of the Vietnamese people, I call arrogance and a (*)(*)(*)(*)-poor understanding of the country your waging a war in. If you want to call the war in Iraq and the war in Vietnam different, you can do that. Vietnam has trees and Iraq has sand. As you can see they are completely different in some ways. But they are also similar in others. You do not know anything about the country and its people. And you have the same arrogant attitude of establishing a new system of government 'for the sake of the people.' The ironic things is, at the end of this, people are going to complain that 'America wasn't commited enough', 'we could have won if we went all the way', 'that iraq was too backwards', etc...it will be the exact same criticism of the Vietnam War but they will still refuse to see that we could have learned a few things from the Vietnam War when we went to wage the Iraq war.