[Alberta's Child]

I would guess that given the known danger in the area that these soldiers were in, that some some lower ranking officer such as a lieutenant, is in a lot of trouble right now for assigning only two soldiers, without backup, in an area where terrorists were known to be present in force. Such a deployment borders on stupidity or negligence or both.

So does a deployment of only 130,000 troops to occupy a hostile nation the size of California populated by 30+ million people. Which "officer" in the U.S. military is in a lot of trouble right now for making that decision?

[jpsb]

That has been my complaint for a long time now, we need more troops in Iraq.

[finnigan2]

"Which "officer" in the U.S. military is in a lot of trouble right now for making that decision?"

-- Maybe that decision was taken by the same officer who decided that since 70,000 troops were enough to defend a country the size of Canada, then 130,000 should be enough to defend little Iraq.
Unless that officer was counting on those 130,000 to defend Canada so he didn't need to pay for more than 70,000.
Nah, couldn't be.