[Patton@Bastogne]

.


BillTheDrill,


Wretchard had some interesting comments and obsrvations a few days ago about Rumsfeld's most recent trip to Iraq.

Maybe Chalabi's outster was decided during Rumsfeld's consultations during this trip, perhaps even after the CIA and NSA finally obtained solid evidence against Chalabi.


Here are Wretchard's comments:


Some of the critical decisions in this two front war and their relation to the technical handover of sovereignty to the Iraqis in June may be part of the reason for the recent Rumsfeld visit (my speculation) to Iraq.

Rumsfeld arrived in Baghdad on May 13 with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Richard Myers and met with Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez and Ambassador Paul Bremer.

The full purpose of their visit was kept under wraps. "For security reasons, officials are releasing no further details of the visit."

Tea leaf readers will have noted two things about the Rumsfeld visit. He did not meet with CENTCOM CINC General Abizaid and both Rumsfeld and Myers traveled together on an E-4B flying command post.

Rumsfeld and Myers departed for the highly secret mission to Iraq aboard a U.S. Strategic Command E-4B National Airborne Operations Center immediately following their joint testimony to a Senate committee on Capitol Hill May 12.

This was the first time Rumsfeld and Myers had flown together, officials said. The two generally fly aboard separate planes due to security concerns. This was also the first time Rumsfeld has flown aboard the National Airborne Command Center, a modified Boeing 747 jet designed to serve as a survivable mobile command center in a national emergency.

(Speculation alert) It may be that Rumsfeld and Myers were considering an important decision specifically relating to Iraq, one already put forward by Abizaid but requiring an independent assessment, one that required them to stay in touch with the President jointly through the E-4B.

The political storm over prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib and, to a lesser extent the decapitation of Nick Berg, has effaced the really important story in the Iraqi campaign: the US has just beaten back a major counteroffensive by Syria and Iran. Regionally, anticoalition forces mounted major attacks on the Jordanian secret service (using gas) and against targets in Saudi Arabia (a car bomb attack against the Saudi security apparatus).

Within Iraq, simultaneous attacks were launched in April from both the Sunni and Shi'ite lines of departure. While both inflicted some damage, neither stroke has come close to seriously hurting the US position.

It would be natural and not in the least surprising, if Rumsfeld and Myers were not considering what the American riposte should be.



Patton@Bastogne



.

[Billthedrill]

The political storm over prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib and, to a lesser extent the decapitation of Nick Berg, has effaced the really important story in the Iraqi campaign: the US has just beaten back a major counteroffensive by Syria and Iran.

I concur. And if this is the case, do not expect the riposte to consist solely of the ouster of Chalabi. Bush doesn't play penny-ante poker.

Thanks for the ping, BTW - looks like I'm going to have to start hanging out at Wretchard's place.