The military was prepared and trained enough to take down Baghdad in record time.
Is it fair to say they were understaffed and undertrained yet 75% oppose a draft? I saw the documentary on the Discovery channel titled 'Off to War'. Those NG guys weren't too happy about being deployed for the first rotation.. what makes anyone thing they will accept more rotations without complaint?
We've always made misjudgements in war. Normandy, although successful, was victim to miscalculated shelling and bombing to prepare the shores for safe landing. The Sherman's weren't equipped to overcome the hedges so they improvised and took shore obstacles and welded them to the fronts of the tanks so they could drive through them. The new and improved air superiority fighter, the F-4, was poorly equipped to fight MiG's in close range combat. They later had to add a cannon.
See a pattern? In the face of challenge, our boys have always overcome anything in their path to success. They always complete the mission... That is, unless some asshat like Kerry steps in and in treasonous fasion assists in the failure of the mission.
This reminds me of people who focused too much on body armor and armor plating when even those whom had it were being blown to pieces when an IED hit. Those items work in real combat environments, but not against an enemy that fights like cowards.
Make no mistake in judgement, our forces will accomplish their mission. Our soldiers and Marines are the best of the best even at their worst.
"War is a series of catastrophes resulting in victory." - Clemenceau