Hi Bobert,

Re: Your opinion regarding US and a "Vietnem mentality".

"If Iraq pulls it's military back to Bagdad you will have two choices. Starve everyone out, which won't play too well on the world's satge of public opinion... or get into a street brawl. Vietnam was a street brawl held in rice paddies and thick jungles, but non the less a street brawl. Problem was, we seemed to alwayd be brawling on the others guys turf. What's the difference with Iraq? I mean, the enemy will look just like the civilians. The enemy will be holed up in on apartment building after another. Hey, sure, you can bring in an Apache gunship and kill lots of folks in those aartment buildings. Unfortunately, most will be civilians... Meanwhile, Saddam's guys will be ambushing our kids in the middle of the the streets."

These "guys" of Saddam's that you are talking about - Now they are the same ones who surrendered in embarassingly large numbers in 1991? Or are you talking about his Revolutionary Guards and Special Revolutionary Guards?

If it's the latter, let's just take a look at what their standing is with the normal man in the street in Baghdad. These "guys" have been pulling your average man off the streets and treating him rather less than civilly for decades. If put to the test the personnel making up Saddam's RG & SRG units have more to fear from the Iraqi people than they do from any force confronting them.

Another parallel with Vietnam that you seem to assume, but which does not in fact exist is this (Claymore will no doubt recognise it's importance from his own past experience). In Iraq you have a number of different ethnic groups, Shia muslims in the south, Sunni muslims for arguements sake in the centre and Iraqi Kurds in the north. Of those groups any intervention force is likely to be well received in the south and in the north. That situation never existed in Vietnam, the "hearts and minds" of the populations living in those areas will be extremely easy to win over. Saddam Hussein could of course bomb them and target them with bio and chemical weapons - but hell, he's been doing that for years so what's the difference.

I would imagine that quite a large number of members of Congress have served. The situation has been laid before them and they have given the current President far greater support than their predecessors ever gave his father. They have done that for reasons that transcend Party Politics. Your rather cheap shot with respect to their children is not so much food for thought, more of a complete and utter red-herring.