RUMSFELD UNDER FIRE(Wesley Clark has accused Rumsfeld of putting troops at risk )

Your long account of the many dangers and risks we face is an extended strawman argument.

These "Neo-Cons" didnt write the war plan. The Pentagon and General Franks did. Forget the armchair generals and civilians involved - the generals say they have what they need and the plan is on track. They have refuted the claims that it is under-resourced, and men are pouring into Iraq as we speak. Today they refuted the claim you make about 6 day halt (reuters gum-flapping) and the logistics - which are overall fine.

In one week, we have secured several major airfields and have 100,000 boots on ground. This is a pace magnificently faster than Gulf War I (40 day air war), and Afghanistan.
We have savagely brutalized Saddam's military machine and his has had to resort to tricks, which wont fool us more than once, to inflict even minor casualties.

Will the people 'welcome us with roses'? I think yes, after we kill Saddam and the fedayeen who are killing anyone who shows willingness to show kindness to coalition.
See that article of the teenage girl killed by fedayeen for waving at troops? Or the Iraqi paramilitary machine gunning fleeing civilians in basra? Desperate gasps of a dying regime trying to whip civilians in line to oppose us. This is just a matter of time. The regime wont be missed by Iraqis.

"Perle actually advocated dropping 5,000 paratroopers on Baghdad, and that a force of that size would be sufficient."

You mock it, but that is actually an innovative concept. It gets to the essential point that what we are fighting is regime change, and a coup d'etat is what is needed. We need not kill 100,000 Iraqis, but the 100 to 1,000 top men running the Iraqi regime...The issue is how to set the support and troops in place so that clean shot at the medusa's head can be made. This whole huge war effort merely is to support the tip of the spear that goes in and guts the Baathist regime in Baghdad. Cut the serpent's head off, and the rest will follow.

Commando like raids have been done into Basra, they will likely be done in Baghdad. It may take a bit more time than the impatient might like (like me), but it will happen.

Watch and see. It is premature to write history yet.

Title: The Neocon Nightmare

Source: NY Press
URL Source: http://www.nypress.com/static/billboard.cfm#1797
Published: Mar 29, 2003
Author: Peter Eavis

Who would've thought that the neocons would be neutralized before Saddam? Incredible as it may seem, events in Iraq have seriously weakened this militaristic group of right-wingers, and its influence over the Pentagon and President Bush should wane from here. Reality has a delightful habit of dealing a crushing blow to militant idealists. It took 70 years for that to happen to Russian communists, but it has been mercifully quick to cripple the neo-cons, who can best be described as American imperialists with a Trotskyite zeal to remake the world.

The resignation of Richard Perle is a refreshing indication that the normal rules of politics apply to the neo-cons. But it is the flimsiness of their military strategy in Iraq that is doing the most damage. In short, Rumsfeld's decision to sign off on a plan that skimps on ground forces and thus leave the coalition's rear exposed will go down as one of the biggest blunders in this war. As a discerning piece by Michael Gordon in today's New York Times points out:

"Another reason why the war in Iraq has been so vexing for American commanders is that the Pentagon did not gather an overwhelming force to start the campaign. The current force is less than half the size of the coalition forces that fought the Persian Gulf War in 1991."
History—ignored by the neocons—has shown again and again that obsessive ideologues don't make good military commanders and the generals will do all they can now to undermine Rumsfeld's influence.

While it's now clear that the neocons are no good at war strategy, their diplomacy has been just as bad. This is well illustrated in a Washington Post piece today on botched efforts to persuade Turkey to station our troops. True, it was always going to be very expensive to buy the Turks over to the U.S. position, but those dollars will now seem cheap as the need for a second front becomes increasingly apparent.

But the blame for all the neo-con foul-ups must be laid at Bush's feet. He crammed his cabinet with these monomaniacs, after all. One can only hope that the White House was behind Perle's departure.

Clearly, Bush can't ditch Rumsfeld just yet, but his days as a real force in Washington are over. Thank goodness, a real general, Colin Powell, is nicely placed to take the reins.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.