If the scenario is not, in and of itself, reasonable then the argument goes out the window. Attacking the scenario is one way of challenging the assertion that war-weariness would cripple the computer, even though it didn't in Civ 4. I have not described war-weariness in detail because I assumed it might work similarly to the way it did before (progressive happiness penalties). Thus, not a timer at all, but a growing incentive to find peace. Please re-read my post carefully. I mention war-weariness as a contributing factor (how could you not), but state that its important has been over-blown. I think you misunderstood. I meant that the US did not recognize that the opinions of the populace was the CoG. They needed to be separated (ideologically, or physically) from the VC. I suppose a fair question is, 'would the 1960s/70s media have allowed for a Malaya-style conduct of the war?' Who knows? Again, it is not about total 'military potential' in Clausewitzian, state-on-state terms. It is about accomplishing specific objectives. Whether or not the US was 'completely exhausted' is irrelevant (they clearly were not). They had reached a point where, for various reasons, they were unwilling to continue to pursue their objectives. This was down to a lack of measurable strategic success (again, not the lack of tactical successes), the absence of a clear imperative to fight, and vocal dissatisfaction with the war at home. Many, for different reasons, ignore the first two and focus solely on the protests. I'm simply trying to remind people that it was merely 'part of the picture', not the end all and be all. Seven years is not a 'short' conflict. In the Seven Years' War the British captured vast tracts of land and did not suffer war-weariness (if anything, the population grew increasingly in favour of the war as it progressed). In Civ 5 the British would have suffered serious, even catastrophic war-weariness. Obviously Civ 5 cannot, and should not, try to create a perfect emulation of the world....that is not my argument. Rather, I am countering your assertion that having 'war-weariness' tied to conquest rather than duration of the war and units lost is an ideal and historically true system. As for the French and Polish uprisings, they are completely beside the point. My point was about a successful war "over there" causing unhappiness at home, which did not happen in Nazi Germany until things started going bad for them (which is why I left that part of the war out....the point was to find conflicts in which short, sharp conquest did not lead to any war-weariness at home to contrast with Civ 5 in which a short, victorious campaign WOULD lead to war-weariness....moreso than a drawn-out stalemated war). Lastly, I would suggest that saying "we" in referencing Vietnam does not help your argument (unless you were there, of course). Neutral language was best (i.e. "the Americans").