[powderhorn]

Presidents don't really create the strategy for fighting wars. That's something the Generals do. Most of the same people that Bush relys on would have been in place for Gore to rely on.

The biggest difference would be that Gore would have a different speech writer.

[nocommies]

are you kidding? the generals are worth SQUAT if the prez doesnt let them go! who do you think makes decisions, anyways? you think tommy franks called bush on september 11th and said, "we're going in on oct 7th. details to follow?" LMAO

[w1andsodidwe]

Presidents don't really create the strategy for fighting wars. That's something the Generals do.

The way I understand it, the Generals give several options, depending upon what the President asks for.

I believe that a President Gore (shudder) would have asked for much different options than our President Bush. It would have been a couple of quick bombings and then nothing. Lots of rhetoric, but no real muscle.

[hinckley buzzard]

Condi Rice and Donald Rumsfeld? I don't think so.

Gore would have had the same people as the clinton regime, like the general who wanted to have every person in the army wear black berets made in Communist China, and the female general who had the NICE campaign to eliminate aggressiveness from the military, and the generals who after 9/11 came to Rummy with a plan so timid and clintonesque he cussed them out and kicked them out of his office and told them to come back with a plan worthy of the United States.

Yeah, different speechwriters too, but very different things to write speeches about.

[Howlin]

Most of the same people that Bush relys on would have been in place for Gore to rely on.

Are you off your rocker? You don't really mean that, do you?

We'd have Joe Lieberman, Maddie Albright, Sandy Berger, Bill Richardson, et al., instead of Rumsfeld, Rice, Cheney, and Powell.

What's the matter with you?