[elfman2]

No statements by General Abizaid, Kimmitt or Conway contradict this. Their statements need to be read carefully and are either very vague or irrelevant to “who” decided to stop the attack.

The military is of course always subservient to political objectives, but halting the attack on Fallujah like this is indicative of the crippling restrictions behind tragedies in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.

Bush is of course principled, but one of his principles is to compromise to whatever degree necessary to claim some positive results when the outcome is not certain.

I think Americans did not struggle and suffer and die in Iraq for the president to compromise.

Some claim that a greater objective is served by this, and others call that a convenient explanation for our political weakness in kicking the knees out from under our Marines in full charge.

Some claim that we can restart the Fallujahn offensive if the Fallujahn Brigade fails. Others say it’s much more difficult now, unlikely, and the damage has been done.

Either way, we now have un-contradicted information on who made the decision to halt the attack on Fallujah.

[elfman2]

“As Falluja goes, so goes central Iraq, as central Iraq goes, so goes the nation," - Colonel John Coleman, chief of staff of 1st Marine Expeditionary Force

[The Bandit]

Politics is what killed over 50,000 soldiers in VN.

[swarthyguy]

Between Falluja and the burgeoning prison scandal, we have a problem, Houston.

[adam_az]

Oh sh*t. :(

[TomGuy]

There were too many conflicting reports about Fallujah the last few days for it NOT to be political. Too many, who should have, seemed to not know what was going on.

History teaches....but politicans never seem to learn.

[mrsmith]

"A reporter said so!"

Well, gee. Can't argue with a sacred reporter, especially a USA Today one- they're as unimpeachable as NYTimes reporters!

But, seriously.

Bremer makes the calls. That's his job.
I doubt he overrode any high Marine. They know what the mission is, to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis.

[My2Cents]

Seems simple: We were prepared to go in, guns blazing. The Iraqi Governing Council had reservations about that. In deference to the Council, we backed off a major offensive. Why is there a fuss about the reality that any option in Iraq is difficult, complex, and has many ramifications? It's easy to sit in front of a computer on FreeRepublic and argue that we should flatten the miserable place. We have to trust to our leaders to figure out how to balance our military advantage with the diplomatic considerations.

[TheLion]

I thought Bush was going to let the military take care of things. So much for that. Politics and the conduct of war are an unfortunate by-product of our way of life.

The military might not have given the real decision makers the right info on what would happen, given certain choices. We may eventually find out.

[Last Dakotan]

Meanwhile in Najaf, we are still negotiating the terms of our surrender.

[LibWhacker]

This should help drive the final nail into that silly, silly argument I saw repeated here ad infinitum that the naysayers couldn't possibly know as much as the "commanders on the ground" and had no business criticizing them.

[vbmoneyspender]

How does Bremer "in turn sort a put in the order to hold back."? As a civilian, how is Bremer even in the chain of command?

[expatguy]

I have posted in numerous threads on this same thing.

The war is over. We lost.

We need to bring our boys home IMMEDIATELY!!!

[Proud Legions]

Hmmm,

May be right, or may be wrong. Not sure why you say this is confirmed just because a USA reporter says it is.

Even if it is, why would the Iraqi Governing Council and Paul Bremmer not have a say on a strategic decision (as opposed to a tactical one)? A strategic decision (in Phase IV operations) is whether or not to attack Fallujah. A tactical one would be how the Marines conduct that operation if told to go in.

[A Jovial Cad]

From the second I saw your post--which I agree entirely with, BTW--I wondered how long it'd take "everything's going great in Falujah!" crowd to show up and begin ridiculing it's premises.
It didn't take long, as witnessed above.
And it's the same old tired bit about "sitting in front of keyboards" and all that cheap-shot claptrap, at that.
Excellent post, thanks for posting it.

[Normal4me]

I would rather see Iraqi troops killed by their own then American troops. The argument for leveling the place goes against everything we stand for and the reasons why we went in to "Liberate" them in the first place.

[Thud]

No one can say yes, but anyone can say no.

[lentulusgracchus]

The sheiks (sp?) were just kind ‘a sipping tea with coalition officials and were nowhere, It was just getting nowhere at all.

Rope-a-dope. "Talk talk, fight fight", v. 2.0. The sheikhs carried proxies for the bad guys, and they put a squeeze play on the Iraqi Governing Council to get Bremer to call off his dogs.

They sat around drinking coffee, to freeze the counteroffensive and give their pals, the bad guys, the win.

Now Bush is screwed, because the bad guys will be able to outlast him, with elections on us. The bad guys will either make their hay while he dithers, trying not to give the Media Left campaign ammunition...........or they get to deal with Kerry, who will give them the whole thing and just bug out.

[Sam Cree]

I don't know what's going on here, but I do know that if you let people push you around, they'll take it as license to continue pushing.

Granted, that didn't happen here, but it sounds like there's a perception that it did.

[lentulusgracchus]

The governing council, the Iraqi governing council, was really upset.

Al Jazeera feeds.

[lepton]

but halting the attack on Fallujah like this is indicative of the crippling restrictions behind tragedies in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.

Well, no. Not really. This was a decision to engage politics, not one to describe in detail how the Marines were to fight.