I see what you're saying, but what about Rock Band? It's not out yet, but I've seen trailers for the Wii version and it looks just like the 360/PS3 versions. Before I saw those trailers, I probably would agree with you, but now I wonder...

You do make a forceful arguement, but I need to point out that an attachment could be made (although it would cost a lot of money, and that could be a problem)

Let's say I want to make an attachment to my car so it can fly and race jet fighters.

What would I do with the car's petrol engine? If I add a propeller to it and tune the engine that still won't be enough to take on a jet fighter.
To actually take on a jet I'd need to add two jet engines to my car to give it a chance of keeping up.
So then that begs the question: why keep the petrol engine in the first place?
If I want to race a jet, there is no point in starting with something that can't be scaled up that far.
That is the problem you have with the Wii.

Wii graphics can be improved, but 360 or PS3 visuals are waaaaaaaaaaaay out of the question whether on high or low resolution.

The Wii isn't only a little bit less powerful.
The Wii's GPU is a Gamecube component that has been overclocked to run at 1.5 times as fast. The whole machine is only twice as powerful as a Gamecube. Essentially an 18month advancement on the gamecube. Wii hardware is 2003 technology. That is how Nintendo are able to make $50 profit on every console sold, and why Sony make nothing.
By comparison the PS3 is 20 times as powerful as the PS2. Roughly 10 to 12 times as powerful as the Wii.

That is why the Wii gets PS2 ports, because it is relatively close to last gen hardware. The PS3 and 360 versions are too far ahead of the Wii to be scaled back.

An attachment to the Wii just wouldn't make any sense.
If you added memory, the slow CPU would hold up the performance.
If you added two more CPUs the bandwidth of the bus would slow up the streaming of data.
If you add any one component the others let the performance down. Without actually replacing everything that is inside the white box you aren't going to be able to get 360 / PS3 performance.

Look at GTA 4. Look how much money it made?
Why did Rockstar make a 360 version when it had always sold GTAs on playstation? Answer: They wanted to maximise their revenue. Why then did they leave out the Wii? With the Wii's user base it would be madness not to create a Wii version if it were possible. If there was any way that Rockstar could have got the game running on Wii don't you think they would have done it?
Same with Infinity Ward and Call of Duty 4.

If you like performance, your only option is to buy a 360 / PS3 or if you love Nintendo franchises, then you'll have to wait til next generation.
I guess it just comes down to the type of games you like to play and how important technology is.

They don't. They still look current gen. Everyone goes on about resolution, but resolution isn't the difference it's the processing power.
Cars the movie by pixar on DVD looks way better than PS3 or 360 in 720p and that is in 480i.

The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.

Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.

15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.

Let me be clear. This is sarcasm