Reading a few stories about this it seems the political leadership is as they sound, really gung-ho for attacking Saddam.
And it seems the military people are afraid to give their honest assessments, for fear of being considered against the political people.
"If you aren't for us you're against us" can be taken too far. There needs to be some dissent, some pointing out the perils.
And if that's your military giving honest appraisals of a military situation, it's even more important. That they feel constrained doesn't seem good.
Read an account of the Bay of Pigs last night. Not a glorious chapter in American annals of overthrowing foreign political leaders. Only two folks were against it - an advisor and a senator. And that was in an atmosphere which encouraged dissent. (Turned out they wanted to overthrow the communist part of that revolution, not the revolution. Cuba was corrupt to the core prior to Castro.)
I have to admit to being uncomfortable with a leadership which sees the world as either for us or against us.
Arf
Current Events » in reply to Military Leaders Question Iraq Plan . . .
This really is sort of scary..
The whole thread (26 posts)
- Military Leaders Question Iraq Plan . . .