It is inevitable that individuals who through no fault of their own
are doing what they are told are going to be looked down upon because
of higher level policy decisions.

Understand.

SAC remained a specified command and not chopped to PACAF or
7th AF for employment. This very issue is the core of Michel's book,
"Eleven Days of Christmas."

Yeah, Michel pretty much blames SAC for everything that went wrong in the world
after 1966, but that doesn't change the fact he was correct about their
involvement in what went wrong during LB II.

Excuse me? If the prisoner release had been agreed to in October (when
Kissinger announced "peace was at hand", why were will still bombing
NVN below 20 degrees N. throughout November?

Because Nixon didn't want to give the NVN the impression that by simply
agreeing to the Paris Peace Accord in principle, they were going to get relief
before they signed it. Secondly, and even more important, Nixon knew he was
leaving Theiu in a bad position. There were tens of thousands of NVA across the
border in South Vietnam and the Paris Peace Accord required the removal of
*none* of them. Nixon knew Thieu would take issue with it (and he did, this was
the main reason he wouldn't agree with the Paris Peace Accord. Of course, SVN
was not a signatory to it, so it only mattered to Nixon and Kissenger that
Thieu agreed) and he was determined to make the situation south of 20-North as
positive as possible for Thieu and SVN.

The NVN/VC walked out in
Paris in November when we suspended bombing and refused to sign an
agreement.

We suspended bombing north of the 20th on 18 October, as a good will gesture,
since Nixon believed the NVN were finally bargaining in "good faith". The NVN
walked out of the peace talks on 13 Dec, they didn't just walk out for the hell
of it. They walked out for two reasons; 1. We returned with new demands that
included the removal of all NVA troops and Viet Cong insurgeants. Le Duc Tho
had never even admitted that any NVA troops had crossed into SVN and he was
sure as hell not going to sign an agreement removing troops he had always
denied were there. The second reason goes hand-in-hand with the first. As the
delay grew for the final signing of the Paris Peace Accord, several democratic
congressman publically called for a House and Senate vote on suspending funding
for the war in SE Asia. Suddenly NVN could see themselves getting everything
they wanted without having to give up anything. As soon as we returned with new
demands, Le Duc Tho took a gamble and walked out. All LB II did was show Tho
that Nixon could still pull off strong military action without an uproar (or
even a vote on funding) from congress. Once Tho realized he wasn't going to get
the whole enchillada, he returned to sign *the original* peace accord.

Linebacker I was significantly more effective than Rolling Thunder.

Agree.

But,
the damage inflicted by LB II was the decisive factor.

I'll have to disagree with you there Ed. I did a lot of research for a 40 page
masters thesis and nearly every target struck during LB II had either already
been struck during LB I or was struck repeatedly during LB II basically turning
over rubble. Ed, B-52s alone dropped over 4,000 M-117 on the Kinh No
railyard...which had already been 60% disabled in November. BUFFs dropped over
3,000 M-117 on the Thai Nguyen Thermal Power Plant....also struck repeatedly in
November. I mean, come on Ed, they sent 36 B-52 sorties after the damn Hanoi
Radio site, dropped over 3,000 bombs, lost 4 B-52s and never even took the damn
thing out. On day #9 a pair of F-4Es hit it with a few LGBs and knocked it off
the air for months. No Ed, I'm going to have to disagree, we were mainly
turning over rubble and making a political statement during those days and
nights.

Academic
interpretation of the events will not prevail as long as there are a
bunch of us participants still around to speak the truth.

I'm sorry Ed, but I've researched every target hit by B-52s during LB II and
even the ones struck for the first time (and there were only 3 or 4) were hit
again and again. I used an accuracy of 1000 feet and plugged the numbers into
todays targeteering software and the .pd inflicted on nearly every BUFF target
was .8 or better after being struck the second time. Problem is most targets
were hit 3, 4 or even 5 times. I know you've seen me say this to Kramer before
Ed, but just because you were a participant doesn't mean you've got an accurate
view of events.

On a similar subject, I'll be attending Army General Command & Staff College
next year at Ft. Leavenworth and I just received my "book report" reading list
for the Air Force prep course preceeding the Army course (basic Air Force 101 I
guess ??). #21 on a list of 26 was "When Thunder Rolled". I guess I'll have to
pick it up Ed. Looking forward to reading it.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"