[dougd]

Why not 1,000 days ago

1000 days ago it probably would not have worked and likely would have made the situation worse:

(1) The Iraqis were not then sick of AQ. More troops would have fed the fear among many that we were there to occupy and take over.

(2) We had not then developed the current strategy. More troops under the old strategy would not have been effective.

The point is, we are still pursuing the old strategy which is not wrong - to train and stand up the Iraqi security forces (top level state building) and combined it with Petraeus' new ideas of standing up local security and rehabilitation (bottom up state building).

They both have their place, but the second part had to await the Iraqis having educated themselves as to the disaster of the alternatives they were sold by AQ and other sectarian factions.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The mistake was done in the beginning. The Iraqi Army should have been kept whole. We've spent lives and treasure doing what could have done with an existing force with a stake in the action. They could've played a dominant role in keeping out the terrorists but, since they were cashiered, they didn't give a damn and cheered every time one of our's was lost. This is so obvious; has not one of W's team had Psychology I ?

[Southack]

Your post #73 above is very well said. Thoughtful. Correct.