This is just an aside, but an important one:
The surge was successful and it was done with a surge merely 30,000 more troops.
Not with 500,000 troops.
Just a GRAND total of 180,000.
A total more in line with Rumsfeld than McCain or Shinseki.
It was all about ROE and offensively targeting the enemy and NOT troop levels.
And also about gaining time for the Iraq forces to step up. And they have.
Rumsfeld is vindicated.
DEDICATED TO EXPOSING DISINFORMATION AND PROPAGANDA AND TO PROMOTING UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS - WITH SHARP ANALYSIS AND BLUNT COMMENTARY. NO ADS. NO TIP-JAR. JUST THE TRUTH.
"Vindicated?"
ReplyDeleteFirst off, there are over 300k soldiers and hired guns currently in Iraq.
But if you are going to claim that an extra 30,000 troops were all that was needed to defeat the Iraq insurgency, then you have to wonder...
...why did it take our war strategists four years to figure it out and deploy them? If Rumsfeld was right all along, why didn't he make it happen in the days or weeks (certainly not months) that he predicted the war would last? Seems to me that he blew our opportunity of ending this war early and easy.
DAVID; LEARN TO READ.
ReplyDeleteHERE'S WHAT I WROTE:
"It was all about ROE and offensively targeting the enemy and NOT troop levels."
AND:
"And also about gaining time for the Iraq forces to step up. And they have."
RUMSFELD WAS RIGHT ABOUT TROOP LEVELS.
NOT SHINSEKI OR MCCAIN.
AND U R STILL AN ASS.
AN IDIOTIC LEFTIE ASS.
HAPPY NEW YEAR.