They don't need to roar. All they have to do is ask questions. "General Franks, why didn't you push for more troops?" "General Franks, why wasn't more thought given to what happens when Saddam was defeated?" "General Franks, why didn't you oppose the total disbanding of the Iraqi army instead of retaining it to keep order?" "General Franks, the surge is working. Why didn't you think to try the same tactics when you were in command?" "General Franks, how many casualties do you think could have been avoided if you had only done things differently?" Franks would be a constant reminder that the occupation of Iraq went badly for a long while under his command and Abizad's, before Petraeus came and pulled their chestnuts out of the fire. And if the surge can't be sustained and the situation in Iraq grows worse again then he's a connection with the war that the Republican presidential candidate won't need.
I don’t agree with your premise and so don’t know how to answer your observations. Sorry, but I have not yet bought into the media and left winged line that things have been going ‘badly’ in Iraq.....IT’S WAR!!
Perhaps some mistakes here and there, but no war plan survives the first encounter with the enemy. This is going to be a long struggle and we had better be ready to step up to the reality of our enemy.
I understand what you are saying and perhaps I am not facing the reality of our ‘enemies’ at home and their ability to shape the sheeple’s minds, but I’d rather go down fighting for what is right than for what is politically expedient.
Have no fear though...I am not running any republican campaigns.....lol