nice to see my article has continued on without me while I been recuperating from latest bout with hep c.

It is not just me but most Americans (about 75%) believe we were wrong

Yea, the same people that watch the news and eat up everything they throw at them? Please do you really believe that most of this nation even knows what going on in the US or around the world or even in our own Gov't? They only know what the news tells them and just like MM says 8 Generals out of thousands are not Most.

BTW, how do you know about that book, does that mean that you too have read it? Kinda hypocritical don't you think? Why am I even bothering, you won't accept anything anyone says here.

moderateman

You are confusing the number of generals that have called for Rumsfeld to go and the generals that have come out to say the reason for the current insurgency is because we did not have the troop levels needed co control Iraq when Saddam fell. There are many more then 8 and almost ALL the generals except Franks, that were close to this war have said it was not conducted properly.

I just completed the Zinni and Trainor Books and the issue of troop levels runs from the start of the Bush administration to this day. Bush and Rummy refused to listen to the military experts.

The statement by Rumsfeld that you go to War with the army you have not the Army you want is a clear example of the lies. We DID NOT have to go to war with Iraq because they were no danger which the military had concluded prior to March 2003. There was no need to attack in March 2003 since we had not been attacked by Iraq nor was there any danger from such an attack. Thus the choice to fight as well as the timing was of our choosing. The fact is we did not have the manpower or the proper equipment in March 2003 to invade Iraq. WHY THEN DID WE INVADE IRAQ?

Another example of the falsehood of Rumsfeld going to was with the Army you have statement is WWII. When we did not have the force levels needed we conducted the fight a delaying action was fought until we had the troops and equipment that was needed. That was true in Europe and in the Pacific until the fight in Europe released the troops and equipment needed.

Another example of the falsehood of Rumsfeld going to was with the Army you have statement is WWII. When we did not have the force levels needed we conducted the fight a delaying action was fought until we had the troops and equipment that was needed. That was true in Europe and in the Pacific until the fight in Europe released the troops and equipment needed.

I notice that you "totally" blew off the statement I post from Major General Lynch. How totally typical of you!

I guess you missed that this month we had more deaths then any other month. The issue is that had we provided the troop levels that the military wanted (500,000) there would not be the violence from any source and that is what most of the most senior (3 and 4 star Generals ) have now stated.

drmiler

I guess you also missed the interview about two weeks ago on CNN with Gen Casey, the commander in Iraq who said the problem is the insurgents and the conflict between the three factions in Iraq.

drmiler I guess you also missed the interview about two weeks ago on CNN with Gen Casey, the commander in Iraq who said the problem is the insurgents and the conflict between the three factions in Iraq

As per usual you're blowing off a heavy hitter here. Basically saying that he has no idea of what's going on and Gen Casey has "all" the answers! And then you wonder why I call you a "moron".

drmiler

My Hitter has 4 Stars and is the Commanding General yours is a 2 star staff officer. You lose!

drmiler My Hitter has 4 Stars and is the Commanding General yours is a 2 star staff officer. You lose!

Hey clown....no YOU lose! You forget two simple FACTS! Number of stars does NOT equal amount of knowledge. And commanding generals do NOT do field work. They sit in an office an rely on reports from their STAFF OFFICERS who are usually in the field. Again you are trying to say that your source has ALL the answers and no one else knows anything. So once again you have been handed your comeuppance by an "enlisted man"!

You truly show just how dumb and ignorant you are. Not only does Casey state the issue is mainly between the factions in Iraq and not foreign elements like Al Qaeda but the CIA have also confirmed the same thing.

Regardless weather the violence is 80% Internal and 20% external or some other split, we allowed ALL of it to develop by not providing the force levels needed to PREVENT the factions, from what ever the source, from developing into the daily violence that has killed more American troops in April then EVER before. At the same time we have BUSH AND RYUMMY TELLING US HOW EVETYTHING IS GETTING BETTER. Tell that to the families of the ever growing number of dead and injured Americas from this unwarranted Iraq War! Just read the most recent information from the European CIA Chief Drumheller. He said Bush ignored the intelligence that said Saddam was NO THREAT to America.

You truly show just how dumb and ignorant you are. Not only does Casey state the issue is mainly between the factions in Iraq and not foreign elements like Al Qaeda but the CIA have also confirmed the same thing. Regardless weather the violence is 80% Internal and 20% external or some other split, we allowed ALL of it to develop by not providing the force levels needed to PREVENT the factions, from what ever the source, from developing into the daily violence that has killed more American troops in April then EVER before. At the same time we have BUSH AND RYUMMY TELLING US HOW EVETYTHING IS GETTING BETTER. Tell that to the families of the ever growing number of dead and injured Americas from this unwarranted Iraq War! Just read the most recent information from the European CIA Chief Drumheller. He said Bush ignored the intelligence that said Saddam was NO THREAT to America.

You STILL don't get it do you fool? Has Casey been in the field? I seriously doubt it! Which means he gets his information from his STAFF OFFICERS! How does it feel to be shown a fool in front of the entire JU community?

Daiwa That is just what we did in the first Gulf War. We sent 495,000 troops. That was to deal with a much smaller country without the internal disputes that we knew existed in Iraq. Bush 41 listened to his military experts. Bush 43 did not. Look at the difference in the results!

How assinine. Two totally different military campaigns with completely different objectives. And we knew from GW1 that half a million troops were not needed to defeat Iraq's army. Had any of those GW1 troops "occupied" Iraq, we might have a comparison to make, but you're talking total apples & oranges, as usual. Lame, Gene, really lame.

drmiler -

We know he's a broken record. I'm finally ready to ignore him.

You truly show just how dumb and ignorant you are. Not only does Casey state the issue is mainly between the factions in Iraq and not foreign elements like Al Qaeda but the CIA have also confirmed the same thing. Regardless weather the violence is 80% Internal and 20% external or some other split, we allowed ALL of it to develop by not providing the force levels needed to PREVENT the factions, from what ever the source, from developing into the daily violence that has killed more American troops in April then EVER before. At the same time we have BUSH AND RYUMMY TELLING US HOW EVETYTHING IS GETTING BETTER. Tell that to the families of the ever growing number of dead and injured Americas from this unwarranted Iraq War! Just read the most recent information from the European CIA Chief Drumheller. He said Bush ignored the intelligence that said Saddam was NO THREAT to America. You STILL don't get it do you fool? Has Casey been in the field? I seriously doubt it! Which means he gets his information from his STAFF OFFICERS! How does it feel to be shown a fool in front of the entire JU community?

COME ON clown answer the question! Just where does Gen Casey get his info?

Reply By: drmilerPosted: Friday, April 28, 2006

COME ON clown answer the question! Just where does Gen Casey get his info?

he would tell you but then the CIA would have to wet work you. heh heh

But you do get my point? Right?

Yes, to a point--but I do not go along with the gung ho fervor for a war based on false premises.

Yes, to a point--but I do not go along with the gung ho fervor for a war based on false premises.

For a moment Just assume that the premise was not false, just not according to the intelligence of the day. Now, if you see the threat as real (pretend remember), then would you go along?