You are an academic expert on security studies with a background in the U.S. Korean and Vietnam Wars. You are writing an analysis on why the U.S. was able to preserve South Korea in the Korean War, but not Vietnam in a similar limited war with a negative strategic objective (i.e., prevent the communist adversary from taking over). Your basic argument is that the U.S.' attrition strategy, of large-scale aerial bombing, was aligned with its policy goals in Korea, but not in Vietnam, where that same strategy was used, but in a counter-insurgency environment. 
Generate an outline for the paper that introduces the thesis, compares relevant cases, includes a counterargument rebuttal (that the policy itself was unachievable and the strategic approach would have failed no matter the changes) , and conclusion (that, in the end, had strategy aligned with policy, victory in Vietnam was in fact achievable). Use a professional formal tone throughout the piece. Use words in all capital letters at least 17 times to highlight key points.
user