The Freeway Blogger has a new blog site—gasoline stations:
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
Remember when WHATADICK Cheney and that draft-dodger Monkeyface Bush told us the Iraq war would pay for itself with oil? Remember?
Yep, and they also said it probably wouldn’t even take six months. I suppose they were kind of right….
This is great, and true.
I confess that I’m traveling as I read HA this week. Please forgive me.
They might have got a little more public sympathy if they’d been honest and admitted the purpose of invading Iraq was to steal their oil … and Iran would be next. We already know half of America’s voters don’t have a conscience, and that half might have continued to support them if they knew their objective was cheap gas instead of torturing innocent Iraqis for fun.
Maybe the real reason was simply to give whiners something to bitch about. If so, I think they succeeded.
Yeah, guys. I-Burn is right. Stop whining about torture, our economy in the toilet, and the destruction of the constitution.
Yay America!
@6
That is hardly what I said, or implied.
How do we know that amputation wasn’t the punishment from being caught shoplifting an orange or something from a flee market in Riyadh?
We’ve cut our driving WAY BACK..
We’ll be trying to make a tank stretch a whole month before we’re through.
Oh those days when a $35 fillup seemed ridiculous.
President Bush today announced plans to carve Iraq into two regions, “Full Serve” and “Self Serve.”
5 IB
What you could read in the newspaper yesterday afternoon:
– The Dow fell 236 points to 11,147.
– The S&P 500 dropped 29 points to 1,244.
– The Nasdaq composite lost shed than 2.5% of its value, losing nearly 60 points to 2,234.
– Declining issues led advancers by a 2 to 1 margin.
And I’ll bet those damn whiners are bitching about THAT, too!
8 T
Yeah, because we KNOW that there are no kids getting their limbs blown off by noble American bombs in Iraq.
The only thing missing is Bush kissing the Saudi king before the insertion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSaZ5v1eW5I
The Saudis won’t increase oil production because it’s physically impossible. They’ve already reached peak production and that’s the end of the show for them. They have to pump in water to get oil out of their wells. Saudi oil production is in a long, slow decline. And so is the entire Middle East.
@12
Daddy Love, why don’t you give us a list of pre-Bush presidency marches you attended protesting the U.S.’s global military dominance vis-a-vis its use of military bases (over 750) to use as a launching pad for future foreign wars, like the one we’re in now.
And this is a real question. I want to see the dates and locations of the marches you attended.
Yesterday, the Bush administration announced that it was working on a plan to deal with the housing finance industry. The justice department last week also announced that it is investigating “mortgage fraud”.
But the justice department isn’t investigating mortgage brokers and the financing companies which used shaky investment deals to finance the sub-prime mortgage market. Nobody is investigating why the Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, the FHA, the Treasury Dept., and the Securities and exchange commission didn’t put the brake on these dangerous lending practices, which were designed to make a fast buck off of equity-skimming and loan-origination fees and pass of the risk to others.
Instead, both agencies are going to focus on who they have already decided, without investigation, is the main culprit – the homeowners who “bought more house than they can afford”. Ignoring, in the process, that for about three years these were the only loan packages available for many first-time borrowers, and many firms refused to process loans for traditional mortgages, fraudulently telling the buyers that they couldn’t qualify and putting them into sub-prime loan packages instead (which were much more lucrative to the mortgage firms).
Typical Republican strategy. First, ignore a problem, then argue that the problem doesn’t really exist, and then when it starts showing up as being a major factor in polling, treat it as a public-relations problem by blaming the victim. The did it in the Plame affair, Katrina, the attorney-general scandal, and lots of others.
PI @ 14: Pumping in water to extract oil is a common proceedure, been in use for decades around the world. Naturally pressurized wells (“gushers”) are relatively rare, and usually co-exist with large deposits of natural gas. Whether or not an oil reserve is on the decline has nothing to do with using water to assist in pumping operations.
But it might be true that Saudi production HAS reached it’s peak. It’s just that it’s another issue.
ahemmm,
Congress controlled by Democrats….Nothing done about gas and oil…
Of course the pledges used to get into office in 2006 were
” we’re going to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home” NOT
” We are going to lower gas prices” NOT
” We are going to work 5 days a week” NOT
“Bush impeachment” NOT
let fly.
The Senate passed the Medicare bill yesterday. Bush had promised to veto it, but it passed the House with a veto-proof majority, and in the Senate a vote to close the debate passed by 67 votes, also a veto-proof majority, effectively endind a threatened Republican filibuster and guaranteeing passage by a veto-proof 2/3 of the Senate. The vote was dramatic as Sen. Edward Kennedy, who has been recovering from brain surgery, appeared on the floor to vote for the bill to the standing applause of senators from both sides of the aisle.
Source: Kennedy makes it to vote on Medicare
Still trying to figure out what the republicans did about oil and energy crisis during the six years they controlled the White House AND the Congress. Oh yeah – they didn’t do shit!
4 “We already know half of America’s voters don’t have a conscience, and that half might have continued to support them if they knew their objective was cheap gas instead of torturing innocent Iraqis for fun.”
Except, Roger, that wasn’t the objective. Rather, it’s been to gain control over as much as possible of the world’s supplies and keep them in the ground until the price goes waaaaaaaaaay up.
Of course, McCain probably doesn’t see any need for Medicare reform. Although other veterans have their benefits linked to Medicare, his medical insurance is still provided by the U.S. taxpayer under the Senate’s Blue Cross plan. You know, the same plan Hillary Clinton wanted to make available to all U.S. citizens, but McCain blasted as being “irrisponsible” and “socialistic medicine”.
If push comes to shove, and they need coverage which the Senate plan doesn’t allow (hard to image), Cindy McCain can just buy a hospital.
Anybody else taken a look at what’s been going on on Lake Union and Lake Washington the last couple of sunny summer weeks? ALMOST NOTHING! Just a year ago you would have seen thousands of pleasure craft. Now there are only a handful, and most of those are powered by wind or muscles. Everyone else as “cruising at the dock”.
12 Make that “noble American cluster bombs”.
Maim more for the money.
Gee, maybe some of the McCain supporters can answer this question for me. Has McCain EVER held a job which wasn’t paid for by the U.S. taxpayer? Not that there’s any problem with being a professional public servant – there are lots of dedicated, patriotic Americans who have spent their career in goverment.
But most of us have at least something we can point to as having worked in the private sector, SOMETIME in our life (other than lobbying). In high school I worked as a lifegaurd, swim instructor, and on the loading dock of a textile company. In college I held a variety of part-time jobs – as a clerk in a tropical fish store, cook, bartender, etc., not even counting jobs I held working in some capacity for the University.
I’m sure there must be something – I just don’t see it on his resume. Didn’t he at least mow lawns or shovel snow for a few bucks when he was a kid?
That picture better not be stuck to a pump where MTR fills up his SUV. We wouldn’t want to see him get arrested for whacking off in public.
Oh, wait a minute…never mind.
I’m a little skeptical about the value of cracking down on fossil fuel speculators. If the speculators overreach then people will just conserve and cut back and they’ll be SOL. Speculators play a role in the markets and you’re going to hurt the efficient operation of the markets if you crack down too hard. Some limited reforms I support and I believe will help but I think will only be limited to sharp increases in prices like that 10 dollar run up we saw not too long ago.
The best way to settle down prices is 1) end the stupid occupation in Iraq and stanch the ugly fiscal bleeding 2) reach an accommodation with Iran and Israel/Palestine 3) accelerate turning away from fossil fuel in coordination with the EU and Japan as a matter of national security which includes crucial economic and environmental components.
There’s so many great alternative energy and carbon management technologies out there. High fossil fuel prices have their upside in making these technologies viable. And high fossil fuel prices will help the Iraqis pull themselves out of the sand if they can hold their government together – yeah I know, we can only hope.
25 That might also be said of the Clintons. In fact, Bill pointed out when they bought their place in New York that it was the first time since they were married that they weren’t living in publicly-owned housing.
Roger Rabbit – what Iraqi oil did we steal? Last I checked we’re buying it on the open market, Iraqi oil is part of that. How does Goldy allow you to get away with such lies?
Oceania is at war with MidAsia.
Oceania has always been at war with MidAsia.
Oceania always will be at war with MidAsia.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
PRIVACY IS LONELINESS
KETCHUP IS A VEGETABLE
WALKING IS GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH
29 Were you born stupid, or are you a self-made man?
Right Stuff @ 18:
I’m getting tired of this “Democratic Congress” or “Democratic-controlled Congress” nonsense you spout.
The Democrats might have a majority in both houses, but most Democratic initiatives have been blocked by Republicans in the Senate filibuster (or promising to filibuster) any bills which contain ANYTHING they don’t agree with. Under those circumstances, 41% of the Senate is what is really controlling Congress. And that doesn’t even count the promised Bush vetoes, which means that only 34 Senators (out of 100) can block any Democratic legislative initiatives by preventing a veto-proof majority.
And when the legislation is clearly popular among the voters but not to the Republican financial elite which runs the party, they block and obstruct it at every turn, only to instruct their “vulnerable” members (like Reichart) to vote for final passage – but only if they know it is going to pass anyway, despite their attempts to kill the bill.
So the Republicans block and obstruct, and then blame the Democrats for “not doing anything”. You used to get away with those lies, but not anymore. That dog won’t hunt anymore.
Daddy Love, your refusal to answer my question is not going unnoticed by me.
The United Airlines mileage plan just sent me the following. I sincerly doubt that they mind it being reproduced:
============================================================
An open letter to all airline customers
============================================================
Dear Airline Customer,
Last week, crude oil hit an all-time high of $146, and the
skyrocketing cost of fuel is impacting our customers, our
employees, the communities we serve, and the economy as a
whole. United, and the majority of other major U.S.
airlines, are asking our most loyal customers to join us in
pushing for legislation to add more transparency and
disclosure in the oil markets. Please see the attached open
letter from the leaders of the U.S. airline industry.
————————————————————
An Open letter to All Airline Customers:
————————————————————
Our country is facing a possible sharp economic downturn
because of skyrocketing oil and fuel prices, but by
pulling together, we can all do something to help now.
For airlines, ultra-expensive fuel means thousands of
lost jobs and severe reductions in air service to both
large and small communities. To the broader economy, oil
prices mean slower activity and widespread economic pain.
This pain can be alleviated, and that is why we are taking
the extraordinary step of writing this joint letter to our
customers. Since high oil prices are partly a response to
normal market forces, the nation needs to focus on
increased energy supplies and conservation. However,
there is another side to this story because normal market
forces are being dangerously amplified by poorly
regulated market speculation.
Twenty years ago, 21 percent of oil contracts were
purchased by speculators who trade oil on paper with
no intention of ever taking delivery. Today, oil
speculators purchase 66 percent of all oil futures
contracts, and that reflects just the transactions that
are known. Speculators buy up large amounts of oil and
then sell it to each other again and again. A barrel of
oil may trade 20-plus times before it is delivered and
used; the price goes up with each trade and consumers
pick up the final tab. Some market experts estimate
that current prices reflect as much as $30 to $60 per
barrel in unnecessary speculative costs.
Over seventy years ago, Congress established regulations
to control excessive, largely unchecked market
speculation and manipulation. However, over the past
two decades, these regulatory limits have been weakened
or removed. We believe that restoring and enforcing
these limits, along with several other modest measures,
will provide more disclosure, transparency and sound
market oversight. Together, these reforms will help
cool the over-heated oil market and permit the
economy to prosper.
The nation needs to pull together to reform the oil
markets and solve this growing problem.
We need your help. Get more information and contact
Congress by visiting StopOilSpeculationNow.com.
http://www.unitedoffers.com/60.....0602bf5384
Robert Fornaro
Chairman, President and CEO
AirTran Airways
Bill Ayer
Chairman, President and CEO
Alaska Airlines, Inc.
Gerard J. Arpey
Chairman, President and CEO
American Airlines, Inc.
Lawrence W. Kellner
Chairman and CEO
Continental Airlines, Inc.
Richard Anderson
CEO
Delta Air Lines, Inc.
Mark B. Dunkerley
President and CEO
Hawaiian Airlines, Inc.
Dave Barger
CEO
JetBlue Airways Corporation
Timothy E. Hoeksema
Chairman, President and CEO
Midwest Airlines
Douglas M. Steenland
President and CEO
Northwest Airlines, Inc.
Gary Kelly
Chairman and CEO
Southwest Airlines Co.
Glenn F. Tilton
Chairman, President and CEO
United Airlines, Inc.
Douglas Parker
Chairman and CEO
US Airways Group, Inc.
============================================================
32 He knows that. He just keeps reposting this crap to waste our time and energy responding.
Don’t feed the trolls, gang.
Democrats like Obama voted the wrong way on the FISA issue to avoid it being hung around their necks like an albatross by the right wing noise machine.
Republicans have voted the right way on the medicare issue to avoid being tarred and feathered and run out of D.C. on a rail by the seniors.
That’s politics… Sucks doesn’t it?
What the airline executives don’t point out is that the “speculators” include the oil companies themselves, and the same Wall Street shysters who’ve been packing flaky mortgages and credit card debt into “derivatives” and selling them to your friendly neighborhood 401K fund. Think about that the next time you hear some shithead politician talking about putting Social Security and Medicare into private hands.
29: You might want to read about the history of the Iraqi oil industry. When Britain controlled Saudi Arabia and Iraq, it already had oil wells producing in Saudi Arabia under a multi-national consortium. When oil reserves were discovered in Iraq, the British (and the oil companies) didn’t want any competition with the Saudi wells, so they secured the rights to explore and develop those fields in return for royalties based upon actual oil pumped & sold. Of course, since Iraq was a British colony, the British were actually negotiating with themselves, which kindof explains the contract.
Anyway, the consortium did a little exploration, drilled a few of wells, had one producing a miniscule amount, and capped off the rest. Which is where the situation rested until the late 1950’s. The Saudis never got much of anything from the deal, because the wells never “produced”, by design. This kept prices up for the oil pumped from the Saudi wells, which kept everybody happy – except the Iraqis.
The fact that Iraqi economic progress was being held down by the control exercised by the oil consortium was a major point which focused Iraqi anger agains the British and their installed government, which resulted in the Bathist revolution.
Now Bush & Co. are trying to get the current Iraqi government to sign a similar deal. They told him to go jump into the Persian Gulf. Now the Bush regime is making threats about cutting off all funding to repair infrastructure damage unless they sign the agreement. Deja Vu all over again, at least to the Iraqis.
33 T
Oh, no, I answered it fully @12
You see, there is no question about whether THIS PARTICULAR KID is the specific victim of some specific atrocity. Who cares if this kid is or not? (a) HE still needs his wounds tended.
(b) There are thousands of kids without limbs quite clearly due to our invasion, occupation, and direct USA military action, and whoever is in the picture is just a poor stand-in for those thousamnds.
The only thing special about his exact circumstance is that it gives you an avenue to try to distract us from that larger truth, a truth that you cannot deny.
Question: What’s 60% of 150,000?
@32 RHP
You crack me up..
“So the Republicans block and obstruct, and then blame the Democrats for “not doing anything”. You used to get away with those lies, but not anymore. That dog won’t hunt anymore.”
Please then point to your same angst when the same arguments are made about the 4.5 years Republicans controlled congress.
And it’s not 6 because the senate was controlled by Dems for 1.5 years 02-03…
I simply use the language of the Democrats back at Democrats….
So just that we are clear.
Currently obstructionist Republicans..
00-06 obstructionist Democrats..
let fly
Children and armed conflict – Report of the Secretary-General
That’s not all, not by a long shot.
Daddy Love, I’ll ask it again:
… give us a list of pre-Bush presidency marches you attended protesting the U.S.’s global military dominance vis-a-vis its use of military bases (over 750) to use as a launching pad for future foreign wars, like the one we’re in now.
And this is a real question. I want to see the dates and locations of the marches you attended.
40 RS
Don’t worry. After this election we won’t have to worry about filibusters. Or vetoes.
42 T
Um, when ever did you ask this, and what does it have to do with anything? Heck, when was the last post in which I complained about American military bases?
You see, what I have a problem with is our violent, illegal, and unnecessary invasion and occupation of a peaceful foreign country.
I thought it was a illegal, stupid, and immoral idea in Panama and Haiti as well, though our occupations in those cases were mercifully (for the native populations) brief. I was a little young for our invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965, but would have opposed it. We should not have occupied Vietnam. We should not have eingineered the coups in Iran, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Chile.
Our NATO operations I am a little more inclined to give leeway to because of their multilateral nature, but I don’t think that alone excuses all operations. A truly multilateral (as opposed to the GW Bush “fig leaf” method) humanitarian operation is much harder to argue with. For that reason I found it hard to oppse the invasion of Kuwait to expel Saddam.
42 T
I think we should also draw a line in 1989 between the era of Cold War struggle between TWO superpowers and the post-Cold-War era of American supremacy. Military dominance by invasion and attack is even less defensible now.
Prove to me that Bush stole any Iraqi oil.
RS @ 40: Sorry, but when Republicans controlled Congress, the Democrats were pretty cooperative – a lot more than I had hoped for. Even yesterday, they cooperated with the Republicans far more than I would have hoped for.
But more importantly, if they tried to block legislation, they admitted it. They even took credit for it. They didn’t then blame the Republicans for not doing anything.
Being a minority in Congress doesn’t mean you have to lay over and play dead. But a modicum of intellectual honesty would be nice. But the Republicans know that if they admitted what they were doing, then their would be a huge public backlash against them. So they are trying to disquise what they are doing.
@46 Prove to me that you’re not a Republican pedophile.
McCain has “re-launched” his campaign with an ad which contrasts 1960’s hippies with him being a POW in vietnam. I guess the implication is that it’s a choice between him or the hippies.
Source: McCain’s Generation Gap
You know, in a way I feel sorry for some of the POW’s like John McCain. Coming back to America from Vietnam after spending the late 1960’s and early 1970’s away from the U.S. was like being in a time-travel machine. Many were shocked by the music and fashions which were pretty much accepted by Americans by then. Moreover, they missed the turning-point when the middle-class turned against U.S. participation in the Vietnam War, and the realization that the words coming out of the mouths of official spokesman for the government and military were completely at odds with what was actually happening there.
So they, like a small minority of right-wingers who never waivered in their faith in the Vietnam War (“the only mistake we made was not nuking them into a parking lot!”), still see American politics as part of the cold war. It’s either us or them, freedom or communism, morality or immorality. And according to their belief system, protest, long hair, and blue jeans are still immoral, communist, and treasonous.
If that’s his campaign strategy, well, good luck with that. Most of us have moved a long way beyond Vietnam. We respect our soldiers, even if we disagree with the government policy which sent them to war. Many of us were never hippies, growing up in rather conservative homes and limiting our rebellion to pretty safe activities. Many of us agree that the 60’s were an over-reaction to an overly conservative & reactionary culture of the 1950’s – but that doesn’t mean it was all good, or all bad. The indescriminate use of drugs was certainly a poor choice, but I’ll keep classic rock & roll, thank you.
Obama isn’t even a member of the baby-boomer generation, a point which his admirers consider a plus, but which McCain doesn’t even seem to notice.
The ad only seems to highlight how old he is, compared with Obama. You can almost hear a crotchity old man complaining about the “d*mn hippie kids and their d*mn rock & roll. Why can’t they listen to decent music, like Lawrance Welk or Perry Cumo?”
You know, there’s a small block of right-wingers who still continue to believe that we could have “won” the Vietnam war if we had “done it right”, with massive U.S. forces, unrestricted bombing, and a continued U.S. presence which likely would still be continuing today. Go to any Republican event, and you can find a few.
Does McCain really believe that? And if so, is he trying to equate Iraq and Vietnam? In his mind, should we stay in Iraq longer than we stayed in Vietnam? His 100 years comment seems to suggest that.
51: Okay, I’m a little slow today, but I finally figured it out. McCain’s confusing 1968 with 2008!!!! He’s trying to re-run Nixon’s 1968 Presidential campaign! Hey, it worked for Tricky Dick, it should work for him, right?????
Generally speaking, I dislike the derogatory references to McCain’s age, even though I admittedly engaged in it in one of my posts above. After all, Republican policies hurt seniors the most, and we could use their votes in the upcoming election – there’s no need to alianate them.
But I’m beginning to wonder about McCain. I remember the nurses attending my grandmother in the nursing home, who would ask her each day to tell them what day of the week it is, so they could determine her mental state.
What happens if we ask McCain that question, and he responds – July 10, 1968?
@50 rhp
The Vietnam war was winnable. From a strictly military standpoint, the US was very successful, as it was. The problem, however, is that no matter how tactically, or operationally, proficient you are, without strategic insight, you’re doomed. Ask the Germans about that. Things like incomprehensible ROE, micromanagement from the Oval Office, little appreciation of post-war tactical innovation, and other factors, combined to blunt what strategic vision our leadership did manage to summon. Allowing Tet, which was a military disaster for the Viet Cong, to be portrayed back home as a serious setback was unconscionable. Allowing the North Vietnamese to invade and conquer the South was as well. The Ford Administration, and the then Democratic Congress have the blood of many, many thousands of innocent South Vietnamese lives on their heads for that fiasco.
Iraq and Vietnam are not analogous. I would hope that McCain recognizes that.
49/50/51 You got it. Sounds like McCain’s become just another Ronald Reagan–he’s pushing the fantasy that Vietnam was a “noble cause” that could have led to a glorious victory had the politicians unfettered the military leadership and let them kill a few more hundred thousand of those pesky little guys in pajamas.
The really dangerous thing about this is that he’s no doubt all in favor of engaging in other wars to show all the naysayers that “we could have done it right”. This plays perfectly with all the trailer-park knuckle-draggers who sit drinking cheap beer and watching Fox, thinking that what’s going on in the real world is just another made-for-TV movie. To them, there’s hardly any difference between some little brown-skinned kids being blown to bits and some middle-aged schoolteacher bouncing off some muddy rubber balls on “Wipe-Out”.
Pathetic.
@53
Nice. If that particular viewpoint is common among you Dems, I can’t imagine why anyone would think y’all are elitists. Not to mention being a racist (think about that sterotype you just offered)… Must be why you think you’re more capable of running everyone elses life better than they are.
@52 “The Vietnam war was winnable.”
What a crock of shit. The Vietnam war was nothing but geopolitical bullshit.
@54 “Nice.”
Elitist commie-fascist bullshit.
@55
“What a crock of shit. The Vietnam war was nothing but geopolitical bullshit.”
I didn’t say it wasn’t. I never said it should have been fought, only that it could have been won.
“Elitist commie-fascist bullshit”
Mindless braying of the ignorant Dem.
@56 “Mindless braying of the ignorant Dem.”
Like I could give a flying monkey fuck what a commie-fascist traitor like you thinks about anything.
@57 “Like I could give a flying monkey fuck what a commie-fascist traitor like you thinks about anything.”
Probably about as much as I care about the ramblings of an ignorant, pea-brain, like you.
@58 Sigh, you treasonous, child-raping, goat fucking, commie-fascist girly-men are all alike.
54 I hope to hell we’re not still talking about this when 55,000 Americans have died trying to “win” McCain’s “hundred-year war”.
@59
“Profanity is the effort of a weak mind to express itself forcefully.”
Thanks for proving it, once again.
@61 You took offence at the profanity so I fixed it:
@58 Sigh, you treasonous, child-raping, goat copulating, commie-fascist girly-men are all alike.
BrainFartArt@31: Your answer is Door #1
Steve@59&62 the BIGGEST HORSES ASS – Thanks again for delivering a succinct bybygoober rant. It’s so refreshing to see a libtard describe HAs biggest goober.
@64 You commie-fascist pig fucking trolls are just too easily offended for your own good.
RHP
“RS @ 40: Sorry, but when Republicans controlled Congress, the Democrats were pretty cooperative – a lot more than I had hoped for. Even yesterday, they cooperated with the Republicans far more than I would have hoped for.
But more importantly, if they tried to block legislation, they admitted it. They even took credit for it. They didn’t then blame the Republicans for not doing anything.”
Now C’mon man, that is the most intellectually dishonest thing you have ever typed…
By your own logic then either:
1. The Democrats in congress 00-06 “worked well” with Republicans, and are therefore equally acountable for all “blame” assigned to the R’s
2. As stated above, were obstructionists as the minority party…
Was the Vietnam war winnable? Are we still arguing over this?
Some of the guys on the ground said that it was a situation where the U.S. made mistake after mistake, making the situation worse each time. It’s difficult to decide at what point it was “winnable”, but it sure wasn’t as late as the Tet offensive in 1968. The roots of the problem was in the 1940’s and 1950’s, when the U.S. was more concerned about cold-war dichotamies and the economic situation of the French than with the Vietnamese people. The Americans could have supported a Democratic Vietnam in 1945, but instead insisted it revert back to French colonial control. At that point, the OSS-trained guerrillas (taught to fight the Japanese) became the core of the Viet Minh (fighting the French for eventual liberation). Ho Chi Minh stated that he would have gladly allied with the Americans if they would have given Vietnam independence, but since they opposed independence, he was forced to ally with the Soviets and the Chinese.
The basic problem is that South Vietnam was never a nation-state that commanded the loyalty of its citizens. It was an artificially divided nation who’s leaders had no real support among the population. Ho Chi Minh would have won any nation-wide election, so the U.S. government never allowed such an unrestricted election.
Despite the best efforts of a number of Americans, the S. Vietnamese government was thoroughly corrupt, demanding huge kick-backs at every level. Even low-level administrators were required to reach a “quota” of kick-backs to remain in office. The money the Americans injected into the system made matters worse, rather than better.
The S.Vietnamese found that they could get rid of their domestic enemies simply by arresting them as “communists”, local strong-men who were a real or imagined threath were labelled as V.C. and the Americans were sent to extinquish the threat. The creme of the ARVN never left Saigon, it was kept there not to protect it from the V.C., but to protect the S. Vietnamese regime from coup attempts.
One of the big problems was that the Americans insisted on seeing the Vietnam war as a continuation of the cold war in Europe, a dichotomy between Freedom and Communism. The problem is that the Vietnamese didn’t see it that way. The great majority of Vietnamese were Buddist peasants who were quite comfortable with traditional communal farming systems. To them, their enemies were the merchants and government officials, many Catholics who had previously been toadies to the French, who looked down their noses at the peasants and cheated them whenever they could. Guess which side we were on?
The Americans made things worse in 1963-64 when they tried to consolidate rural Vietnamese into larger villages which they thought could be defended easier. The problem was that removing people from their ancient communal land and villages wasn’t very popular. And the government agents in charge of the new, larger villages would charge the new tenants rent, charge them for building materials provided free from the Americans, and submit a big kick-back up the ladder to the higher government officials. Attempts to form a type of “national guard” to defend the villages only provided the Viet Cong with weapons they didn’t previously have access to.
It’s true that the Tet Offensive “broke the back” of the Viet Cong. But it didn’t break the back of the N. Vietnamese army. But with the capture of Hue and the execution of virtually every administrator who had cooperated with the Americans, the Vietnamese learned that the Americans can’t protect them forever. Some day, the Americans will go home, and then the V.C. will deal with those “traitors”, as they called them. This, along with the destruction of that ancient provencial capital, went a long way to making the average Vietnamese see that the best way to survive the war was to hope the Americans left sooner, rather than later, and to not cooperate with them.
Critics who argue that the media coverage of the TET offensive “lost the war” ignore the fact that the TET offensive revealed the very large gap in credibility between the government, the military, and real events on the ground.
Anyway, an American officer in Vietnam after the war told a Vietnamese general: “You know, you never beat us in a major battle”. The Vietnamese general thought, and then replied: “Yes, but that is also irrelevant”.
I could go on (for a book or two), but at what point in this analysis does the Vietnam war become “winnable”, in a military sense? How many decades of occupation against a hostile population would America be willing to endure?