And accuracy, apparently, is unimporant to you. Disprove the article, if you please, or shut up.
I agree with the article.
It doesn’t address who ordered the ceasefire and prohibited heavy weapons in the offensive.
It only hints at it in both directions, including this statement implying that the Marines were tasked to find a solution that didn’t threaten the June 30 turnover.
”What happened, Marines say, is that the stakes in got too big. An all-out assault, Marines say, would have caused mass casualties, further inflamed the entire region and disrupted the planned June 30 turnover of authority to the Iraqis.”Again, short term politics prohibiting a military victory, much like Vietnam.
There. I addressed your attempt to avoid what I outlined up in #92, but I doubt you’ll muster the courage to address it.
I showed you how you are misrepresenting (lying about) my claims. That’s disgraceful.