11-06-2014, 05:05 AM
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Quote:You're a funny guy, but... You still don't get it, lets try and cut this short before you write a book on this thread, the plan failed, but the "design" was NEVER meant too! Don't expect you to understand it though.
Scott, you have made this assertion many times. However, I fail to see you make your case. This is the difficult part, and there is a big difference between the two. When you come against people like DJ and JimDi who do know how to argue a case, you fall short. I hope your book succeeds at least at formulating the argument you have not been able as yet to do here.
Lauren,
How many times do I need to repeat myself before I'm understood? I'll say it again, the "original DESIGN" was NOT meant for failure. The landing at Trinidad had good port facilities it was closer to many existing counter-revolutionary activities it had an easily defensible beachhead, and it offered an escape route into the Escambray Mountains.
Who knows how it would have turned out had the "PLAN" not been changed, all anyone can do is speculate at best. I said it before, and I'll say it again. For those who just don't understand me. THE DESIGN WAS NEVER MEANT FOR FAILURE, HOWEVER, THE PLAN DID. Did I make my point? Do I really need to provide my closing arguments? Isn't it obvious?
Why is everyone dwelling on what happened and can't understand what could have been? The plan failed, the design did not! There's no falling short here, all you have to do is use your head! Case closed! I win!