Hey, we had TEN THOUSAND TROOPS in place in Kuwait back in September. Why Bush was unwilling to invade a country the size of California when he had ten thousand troops at his disposal is beyond my understanding. He must have some ulterior motive...
You are simply misguided if you think it's logical to invade Baghdad with 10,000 troops. No disrespect meant, but 10k ain't gonna cut it.
Maybe I'll have a lot of egg on my face in a month, but I honestly don't think we'll see troops in Baghdad for at least 6 months. Maybe some incremental steps - occupying the oil fields, supporting an uprising in the northern Kurdish territory. But I don't think we'll see a blitzkrieg to Baghdad. We can't hit Saddam yet, we need to give him at least the impression that he still can get what he wants - to stay in power - until we are able to neutralize the possibility of a WMD retaliation against Western civilians.