[GreyFriar]

I will dispute one point with Rush over Gen Shinseki and his opposition to the Iraq war. He said it would take an occupation force of 200,000 soldiers for 10 years to change Iraq. Rumsfeld would not hear it. He wanted a quick in and out, all done in a few months.

What happened? we ended up in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 and deployed over 100,000 soldiers there for several years. Shinseki’s opposition was based upon an analysis of every occupation after a war that the US ever did, beginning with the Mexican War. He wasn’t a “democrat hack” on this but had a firm position that it would not be what Rumsfeld hoped for.

And I have several nephews that deployed.

[Theoria]

Rush has zero credibility on the military and foreign affairs. He is still trying to figure out who the LRA is.

[bagman]

Yeah, Mr Limbaugh did not make a good argument. General
Shinseki was correct in his estimate (and I continue to beleive that the Iraq invasion was a good idea), but Bush did not want to (or could not) expend the political capital to deploy more troops than were used. He and Rumsfield attempted to fight the war on the cheap.

One shouldn’t fight a war if (a) political support for it cannot be generated and/or (b) it is to be fought on the cheap.