An Iraqi general?

What's the point here? Really? Does anyone think an Iraqi general is going to be easier on the civilians than the Marines? Does anyone think the inhabitants of Fallujah will respond differently just because the people who take the city are Iraqis?

Do we have any real generals in our military any more?

I'm beginning to think now that Fallujah needs to be taken, like any city in the history of wartime was taken, to neutralize the threat. Now.

The lesson currently being taught the insurgency is that you don't need to fight if you can talk the coalition down, and that the coalition is damn easy to talk down. The insurgents couldn't get better cooperation from the American media if they were paying them.

The lesson being taught the insurgents in other cities is that you are immune from harm if you place enough civilians around you. What will be the obvious result?

The lesson being taught civilians whose loyalties are fuzzy is that there are no consequences for sheltering insurgents.

"Violent military action by an occupying power against inhabitants of an occupied country will only make matters worse," U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned.

Koffi Annan is a blithering idiot. The 60th anniversary of D-Day is coming up. I would really like to see T-shirts made in the thousands with a picture of Annan and this gasbrained quote on it, and worn all over France.