[fight_truth_decay]

See #38... The General does not single out Bush as lead to believe, he served under his father--in fact he said Bush had an innocence coming in, so blames more so those advising him. He blames a failure in using diplomacy-and says it all started under Carter. The General seems more of a fixer, than a point your finger to how we went wrong kinda guy. He has had experience under Bush and was proud of those times. And all of us can agree we have not always steered the right course. However, he never uses strong rhetoric to denounce Bush. He brings up stupidity after the time in office has moved on, but won't use Bush's name in the same sentence.

Iran is brought up. I was interested in what the General had to say. He knows a Hell of a lot more than I ever will know or pretend to know on this subject. We just have to go forward, we can't change the past, as it just becomes an agenda driven redundancy.

[kinghorse]

I don’t see much to fault with what the President and his advisors did in Iraq. Peace comes after war. They tried to skip a step. Those people weren’t coming around easy. I’m still utterly impressed at how well we did on all levels. Compare this pacification campaign with the Philippines. Good comparison. We stayed in the Philippines for 70 some odd years pacifying as it were :).