All of the books I have read, including the Woodward series including "Plan of Attack" and "State of Denial", then recently Rick's "Fiasco", and "Cobra II" all agree on a number of matters. On some of these only a couple of sources addressed the issues.

Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had made definite plans to go to war no matter what happened in Iraq well over a year before the invasion. The political moves were window-dressing. The US was going to militarily occupy Iraq.

The military planning was driven by Rumsfeld, with oversight by Cheney and Bush. The military recommended 400,000 troops overall, unacceptable to the civilians, and were told to plan with fewer, and then fewer and still fewer people until they "got it right".

US military commanders in the field often asked for more troops, and were denied or ignored.

The military commanders were told to prepare for a draw-down to 30,000 to 34,000 troops incountry by September, 2003, about 6 months after Bush announced the end of major combat operations. Period. That was the exit strategy.

There were no other plans, there was no "Plan B". Since then the "planning" has been on an ad hoc basis, with no grand strategy, no exit strategy, no definition of what "win" would look like. There have been generalities which haven't translated into any reliably measurable realities.

The Iraqi civilians have been treated not as valued people for whom the Americans were liberators, but as co-conspirators, combatants-in-waiting. Upon hearing a gunshot US forces would fire into crowds, for instance. Iraqis ask if they would they routinely do that if those were American citizens? There is the subsequent resentment and hostility.

Whereas Iraq had not sponsored terrorism since Clinton's strike on them in 1993, and had no WMDs, it has since become a hotbed for all manner of terrorists who now have CPA atrocities to help with their recruiting and motivation. Both have been quite successful.

It is often said the military has contingent plans for everything, all the time. That it would be reckless to not have plans. Yet any suggestion that there be planning for post-war Iraq was ignored.

Now, not treated in those books:

In a similar vein, according to Defense officialsIran attack plans are current." The post-war plans, clearly, would have to be left to either the next administration or the current administration should they decide themselves to be invaluable, as does Musharref. (The Bush Administration has said there is no statutory reason they would have to cut aid to Musharref, thereby continuing American funds to be used for the repression of the Pakistanis.) We can confidently assume that the decision to at least bomb Iran has been made and preparations are being made. Watch for the rhetoric to step up and for articles detailing Iranian misdeeds to become more common and virulent. ("Fiasco" author Ricks claims that Iran has always been THE target, with Bush hoping easy victories in Afghanistan and Iraq to bracket the country.) Arf