Reply #16: I'm not disagreeing, but...

[bmcatt]

I think that trying to draw a parallel to Vietman is specious at best, because an attack of Iran is *highly* unlikely to wind up being solely conventional armaments and boots on the ground. The "long range missiles, possibly with nuclear warheads" approach is much more likely.

As much as I'm sure everyone hates the comparison, I think it would be more appropriate to try and imagine that, in 1942, the populace of Germany elected a new leadership. Even if that leadership were anti-war, how, realistically, could they have stopped the war. Hence my Kosh quote (above).