Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tarheelswamprat
..it was not because of the number of troops. It was how they were used, and not used. It was strategic and tactical mismanagement on the part of Bremer..

Yes, and your very good analysis backs up the fact that Shinisky was wrong (in March 2003) in his claim that the US would need 400,000 troops ... or whatever his inflated number was.

My theory was and still is that President Bush, once he realized that the expected stockpiles of "weapons of mass destruction" would not be found, suddenly got cold feet and began to second guess his hard-line advisers and military commanders....

Which simply encouraged US enemies both domestic and abroad to disrupt and distort the ongoing conflict at every opportunity.

The failure to find WMDs fed the egos of the anti-Bush forces in Congress and the media (are there any other kind) and suddenly Bush lost his will to fight.

The other strategic mistake in the lead up to the war was to emphasize the WMD's over and over when the argument SHOULD have been it was vital to dismantle Saddam Hussein's network of terrorist training centers (Iraq at the time harbored Abu Nidal, Abu Abazz, and many many others) and its funding and underlying cooperation with other global terror networks associated with AlQaeda.

Unfortunately, that idiot terrorist Steven Hatfill had everybody in America obsessed with anthrax... which naturally played in to the WMD narrative.

Lastly, if you want to make some quick cash with a bar bet (your target should be a Bush-hating lib), bet him or her $1,000 that Iraq was partly behind the World Trade Center attack.

Well, of course every lib Democrat KNOWS that it was 19 SAUDI's who flew those planes into the WTC ... and thus your patsy will likely jump at the chance to agree to your $1,000 bet.

The trap is sprung.

Then you whip out the court transcripts proving that Iraq had indeed supplied a passport and other help ... FOR THE 1993 WTC ATTACK, which killed six people and failed to topple the towers.

People tend to forget the significant role Saddam Hussein played in the 1993 WTC attacks.

122 posted on 12/07/2008 7:35:01 PM PST by Edit35 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]


To: Edit35
My theory was and still is that President Bush, once he realized that the expected stockpiles of "weapons of mass destruction" would not be found, suddenly got cold feet and began to second guess his hard-line advisers and military commanders.... Which simply encouraged US enemies both domestic and abroad to disrupt and distort the ongoing conflict at every opportunity.

I appreciate your thoughtful reply - that's as plausible a scenario as any. It's a shame that we'll never get a straight answer or explanation from Bush himself...

123 posted on 12/07/2008 8:19:21 PM PST by tarheelswamprat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson