AN EMAIL FROM THE FRONT

andrew sullivan ^ | Wednesday, April 14, 2004 | in iraq

[Coop]

If the Bush administration knew in May 2003 that the events of the last three weeks would have unfolded as they did, do you think they would have even dreamed of staging that event?

I didn't think so.

I can't say. It was a great publicity opportunity, no matter how you slice it. And it was going to be criticized, no matter how you slice it.

[Alberta's Child]

June, July or August would have been the worst time.

These would have been the worst time of the year to be in Iraq, which is why starting the action in March was a bad idea -- unless this administration really believed that most U.S. military personnel would have been out of Iraq after 90 days. Perhaps this was exactly what they thought -- but that makes the administration look even more naive and incompetent.

[Broadside Joe]

Ok I'll ask the same question that you've avoided answering a third time.

Did Saddam or did he not support terrorism?


And that has to do with your following statement.

"If there were other reasons besides lies about WMDs and about connections to Al-Qaeda then I would love to know what they were."

[Coop]

they've done things the way I would have expected the Clinton administration to do them.

That's just an absurd comparison. The Administration has been very open about this entire thing, despite some bleating to the contrary. That's the exact opposite of what the Impeached Rapist would have done. Then again, he wouldn't have made this huge, politically risky move in the first place, unless perhaps he was having another bimbo eruption.

[LADY J]

Just saw Ollie North on Fox with a Marine Squad Leader who was seriosly wounded and awarded the Purple Heart. The wound was serious enough for him to leave country - but he opted to stay and lead his Marine Squad

God bless these brave warriors who understand why they are there. We are blessed to have them protect America from having to fight this war on our soil.

We are a country at war with those who want to kill us and any aid and comfort to the enemy talk will strengthen them. Shame on those who want to demoralize our troops.

[wordsofearnest]

Now who is really hiding their head in the sand?

[Alberta's Child]

It was a great publicity opportunity, no matter how you slice it.

It was a great publicity opportunity if the situation in Iraq had remained quiet for the most part from that point forward.

[SuziQ]

The fact that the 1st Armored Division (my unit) has now been extended for at least 4 months shows there aren't enough troops - in order to deal with a fairly minor uprising we had to break the one-year-boots-on-ground pledge. If we had had a strategic reserve, this would not be necessary. However, the dirty secret is that there aren't any more troops to be had - at least not the active-duty armor/infantry brigades and divisions requried to fight a tough enemy...

I've heard this a lot in the last couple of weeks, and I'm reminded of the situation just before the I Drang battle in Vietnam. There were men in Col. Moore's group who were close to being finished with their tour of duty. Rather than extend their tour, the Army brought in new men who didn't have time to get trained and up to speed before being shipped off. It is believed that the lack of experience of some of those men made the battle more difficult than it need have been. Am I remember this right, AR? I seem to remember having read this in Col. Moore's book.

Experience is a wonderful, though sometimes tough, teacher, and the fact that these men on the ground now HAVE lots of it helps when dealing with a flare up like Fallujah. Imagine the dog's breakfast it could have been with all new troops. They could rotate new folks in a few at a time to get them up to speed and rotate the other guys out slowly. In fact, I believe the military is doing something like that now. There are new folks in who are learning the ropes, so to speak, and the ones who've been there a long time will be coming home.

But we have to remember, this is war, and things don't always go as planned, so our folks have to be flexible. It seems the media is under the impression that the war is over, so that's why they're so incensed about American soldiers continuing to die. It ain't over folks. The President announce that MAJOR operations were over last year, and he was right. We're no longer having to fight all over the entire country. We can now concentrate on the hot spots and deal with the terrorists who are coming in from all over the Middle East; something else the partisan media is mentioning. These are not just Iraqis we're fighting.

[Coop]

No, it was a great publicity opportunity, period.

[Coop]

You keep talking about deceit and lies. Show me proof of a lie.

[Alberta's Child]

Compare the U.S. action in Iraq to the U.S. action in Yugoslavia, and you'll find some remarkable similarities. At least I have been consistent from the beginning with regard to both of them -- I knew we had no business in Yugoslavia, and for largely the same reasons I knew we had no business dealing with Iraq in this manner.

[wordsofearnest]

How pray tell did you know Iraq had no WMD prior to the war?

[Broadside Joe]

"These would have been the worst time of the year to be in Iraq"

No it would be the worst time to be in chem/bio suits like they were in on the way to Baghdad because of the 'imaginary' WMD's. Never minding the fact that they are a lot harder to fight in. And that the Iraqis had these suits stashed all over the place along with atropine injectors for 'imaginary' nerve agents.

"unless this administration really believed that most U.S. military personnel would have been out of Iraq after 90 days"

It was stated they we would be there for years.

[LS]

The fact is, in WW II there were thousands of such critical letters written, though, as you say, never cleared through censors. The reason is a) it's always part of a soldier's life to carp and complain. That is no knock against anyone: it's what soldiers do in their "down time." b) I've repeatedly heard EVERYONE in leadership say that they can't really use more troops. Now, the rotation issue may be a problem, but again, in historical perspective, I don't think (could be wrong) that U.S. units in WW II were rotated very frequently. You went, you fought, and you stayed until you won. End of story.

[Alberta's Child]

How pray tell did you know Iraq had no WMD prior to the war?

Do you really think the U.S. military would have sent 150,000 troops to Iraq if there was any chance in hell that Saddam Hussein possessed the kind of WMDs that we "thought" he had?