The Korean "police action" circa 1950--1953 is a precursor to U.S.
involvement in French Indo China aka Vietnam.

The two were controversial-hated meat-grinding conflicts, which also
precipitated domestic political change fom Democrats to Republicans as
presidents.

Truman--->Eisenhower

Johnson-->Nixon

Circa 1950--1953, the U.S. atomic bomb was not used, and circa 1960 to
circa 1975, the U.S. nuclear bomb wasn't appplied either.

These were deemed "limited wars" that were resisters of the spreading
of Communism, and resulted in mixed success (Korea) & non-success
(Nam).

The U.S. foreign policy from after WW II to the early 1990s may be
theme- titled as against Stalinism-Maoism-Castro etal styles of
"authoritarian communism"

And my profoundly simplistic point is:

In warfare, shite happens such as the horrible deaths of innocent
civilians whom are "in the way" or in a war front's proximity.

On Aug 3, 11:55 am, Robert Cohen msn.com> wrote:

On Aug 4, 12:28 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:

There was a sincere if not necessarily justified concern about
communism.

In sharp contrast both Bush and Cheney are on record from the '90s
saying that toppling Saddam would result in unnecessary loss of life
and endless quagmire -- exactly what has happened.

Not only did they know there was no real threat, they never believed
that an invasion would accomplish anything (other than as a
distraction from domestic politics).

Why impeach now when a war crimes prosecution after they leave in'09
would be so trivial?

Bret Cahill