News flash Domer, the point that the administration wasn't thoroughly prepared for the veracity of the Post-Saddam insurgency has been criticized adnauseum by ALL sides.
It has?
Yea, Js, it has
I have seen grudging acknowledgement from one side then typically terse replies consisting of "what does that matter now?"
That too....................and?
I haven't really seen good critical analysis of how the administration seriously fouled up the post-Saddam reality from "ALL sides" as of yet.
Then you're not paying attention. Willful or accidental would be my question
I'd love to see some of that actually, in order to understand fully what went wrong and why.
I'm not sure why I'm having to repeat this, since it, and many other posts from the right side have been presented numerous other times, but perhaps Js missed all of those as well, so, let's do it again....
Bush and his military folks failed on 2 significant fronts, post-Saddam.
1) they disbanded the Iraqi Army, who H impressed earlier, likely would have been ready and willing for a change from rule under Saddam, the way they were treated (*outside of the Republican Guard perhaps), thus negating a sizable force that could have quickly been retrained under the new Iraqi Government, and thus be able to stabilize the defense of Iraq MUCH faster than currently.
2) Bush and his military folks failed to have several contingincy plans ready to impliment at a moment's notice, which includes the option of a significant increase in the amount of coalition forces, once it was determined how much greater the insurgency was determied to be. Thus allowing those insurgent & terrorist acts to fester, and boil over once some of the mosques and and recruiting centers were hit
NOW, the administration and it's military are countering with a "surge" effort, to attempt to level out the ship. Is it working?, most indications appear to point to yes. Is there still violence?,
of course, it a war. I expect more violent acts to occure even after Iraq has been deemed safe for their own forces to take over security. Have more american soldiers been killed since the surge?,
of course, since more U.S. soldiers are patrolling and working in much more dangerous areas of the insurgency. Have tremendeous accomplishments been made since the fall of Saddam as well,
absolutely, new Democracy, new ratified Constitution in a fraction of the time that would have been considered, record # of voters despite the threat of retaliation. all that scares the living daylights out of Iran, Syria, and similar minded countries......THUS the rationale for their efforts to try and prevent precisely what we're trying to accomplish, as stable democratic muslim country, right at the heart of what used to be a completely safe haven & training grounds for militant Islam
I remember back when the President and the Defense Secretary claimed that it was a "few Saddam loyalists" and then "a few Saddam loyalists and some terrorists." It was apparently never as simple as that and it seemed everyone knew that.
War never is, Js. And that, everyone does know. and please try to remain honest by acknowledging that when we're talking about the areas of instability and insurgent/terrorist acts, we're actually only talking about a small area in all of Iraq, largely being the Suuni triangle. The Kurdish north, and pretty much all of the Shiite south have been largely stable, with very infrequent attacks, and have supported by overwhelming majorities, our efforts to bring democracy to their once oppressed Dictator-run nation
