Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
Uh huh.
I was about to respond with an observation re: Fallujah (would Administration intervention in the attack on the city be a "brass" problem?), but then I realized that your nifty conceit manages to exculpate the Bush Administration for almost everything that's happened after March 2003.
We can continue to float in the ether, exclaiming about the inherent thirst of all peoples to be free, and Saddam's evils, and relegate the multitudes of fuckups since we crossed the border to the Pentagon! We'll pretend that the buck stops with, say, Rumsfeld, who obviously has been seriously reprimanded by Bush, that tough personnel taskmaster, and who we fully expect Bush to let go by 2008 or so.
Brilliant, I tell you! Genius, I say!
|
I have no idea what you are talking about, but my construct puts blame where it is due. Bush is not a general and does not craft battle plans, military strategy, etc.
Here's an example. If Bush is making the call to keep moving in and out of Fallujah, then he deserves blame and credit for that policy. WRT OBL, my guess is that Bush did not tell the generals to use the warlords (if that is indeed the reason OBL got away, if indeed he did). That was a tactical decision by the Brass (and for all I know, the right decision).
Threaded Mode