...I interpreted it as being a severe indictment of anyone who urged caution in invading Afganistan or who thought it was a bad idea outright. I further interpreted it as implying that since things have gone very well indeed, that all of these folks who dared to predict otherwise are idiots.

If my interpretation was incorrect, then some or all of my objections disappear.

If my interpretation is correct then I stand solidly behind my objections. If you try to predict the future you will be wrong or right. Being wrong doesn't make you an idiot and shouldn't discourage you from doing your job in the future.

In this case specifically (as I responded below, the first time this material was posted) anyone who predicted an easy victory in Afganistan was being rash - in my opinion. And it does not matter a bit that their beliefs were born out by events.

On the other hand, if we had for instance, just lost half a division I would not be calling those people who predicted easy victory idiots and making painfully-extended juvenile jokes about how stupid those people were in retrospect. They would only have been wrong, as we all are from time to time.

Again, my interpretation of the material in question is suspect. I only read the top page and scanned the rest.