The 27% problem

[Gunny]

I think Bush is doing a terrible job as President. I gave him a lot of leeway and the benefit of the doubt up until 2004. I acknowledge that he's had to face more challenges than any other President in modern times but that doesn't excuse some of his decisions and non-decisions. I don't know anyone who can say that Bush or Congress is using every resource at our disposal and doing every thing they can for the military to win this war. I think there are other Republicans, like John McCain, Jeb Bush, or Colin Powell, who could have done a much better job and gotten more from our country if they had been elected.

I don't necessarily oppose the war, so much as I object to how it's run. I was for the war in 2002-2003 based on the WMD implications. When those WMD's didn't turn up, I was upset but I was willing to move forward and concentrate on rebuilding Iraq and bringing Democracy to the people. I was for sending 100,000 more troops to Iraq two years ago, but my patience has worn thin as of late. I think we're at the point where we need to take on a secondary role, pull back to the borders, redeploy some of our forces to Afghanistan, while gradually drawing down the main force.

Whether or not the WMDs turned up is irrelevant, IMO. He manufactured, possessed and used WMDs. Fact. While Handjob Blix claims Iraq has no WMDs, he fails to tell us precisely where all the unaccounted for WMDs/their percursors on record at the UN just happened to go to. Also a fact.

Then there's the fact Saddam Hussein acted as if he possessed them, and was hiding them. He WAS nailed in 1993 (two years after he signed the terms of ceasefire) with an active bio lab.

Does anyone HONESTLY believe a leopard changed its spots in mid-game? I don't. The only people that seem to believe it just use it as yet another excuse to attack Bush.

I agree with you in that the occupation after the military invasion has been less than desired, to say the least. However, my opinion from the start was that evil, dirty bastard piece of crap that his was, Saddam Hussein as the force that kept the Shia, Sunni and Kurds speparate was the lesser of two evils compared to what two of those factions have turned rebuilding Iraq into.

I'm also not a big fan of opening a second front unless absolutely necessary. We should have finished up in Afghanistan first. Saddam hadn't gone anywhere in 12 years. He could've kept a few more.

IMO, this is a perfect example of politicians blinded by idealism dictating military strategy and tactics. The idealistic goals and expectations of removing Saddam from power were not very reality-based.

 

[loosecannon]

The only people that seem to believe it just use it as yet another excuse to attack Bush.

Not just another excuse, a collasal excuse. To the winners go the spoils of war, the losers are lucky if they aren't hung.

Bush lost this war and hasn't been able to even justify the risk.

That isn't leadership, it isn't even gambling. It is reckless abuse of power.

 

[Gunny]

Not just another excuse, a collasal excuse. To the winners go the spoils of war, the losers are lucky if they aren't hung.

Bush lost this war and hasn't been able to even justify the risk.

That isn't leadership, it isn't even gambling. It is reckless abuse of power.

There was plenty of legal justification to remove Saddam from power, and the military operation that accomplished just that was a complete success.

So, we did not lose the actual war. The nation-building effort is still up in the air. It isn't over yet.

The only falw in leadership is as I said ... the nation-building effort is neither technically nor tactically sound because tecnhincal and tactical proficiency is being overshadowed by political correctness and political ideology.

 

[loosecannon]

There was plenty of legal justification to remove Saddam from power, and the military operation that accomplished just that was a complete success.

So, we did not lose the actual war. The nation-building effort is still up in the air. It isn't over yet.

The only falw in leadership is as I said ... the nation-building effort is neither technically nor tactically sound because tecnhincal and tactical proficiency is being overshadowed by political correctness and political ideology.

It will be no surprise that I flatly disagree with the first two points.

But I am very curious about the third. VN was supposed to be a lesson in tactical over political.

What mistake do you see us making now that subordinates tactics below politics?

Cuz I think the same but I sorta doubt for the same reason.