[fintstone]

Originally posted by JSDSKI
Fint,
We can agree that it's an all-star cast with a great deal of personal and political experience in real on-the-ground politics. Their review of troop level requirement was based upon information gathered from those actually involved in Iraq war decision making with the benefit of four years of hindsight.

It seems the top of the chain wanted to fight and win in Iraq using new developing principles and ideas. Not all senior military command shared that particular desire and wanted a more standard or "older" strategic battle plan. In the end, top got the generals it wanted rather than the generals it needed. Proof is in the scoreboard.

For what it's worth, I don't think they know military needs any better
than the military creating the plans. I do think they know better than to believe they know better than the generals and admirals they pay for advice. I do think, as a group, they tend to listen to their military experts and fit those recommendations into their policy decisions.

That attitude and that wise practice is real leadership.

The group was just a bunch of "has-been" politicians with little applicable experience to any type of military action. I cannot imagine how they were able to make any type of assessment without ever leaving the safe "green zone" in Baghdad.