The counterinsurgency strategy was only part of the answer. The other was the surge. We've gone over this many times but you like to pretend the surge had nothing to do with it. Clearly having the troops to maintain security in an area after it was cleared out has been a huge factor in stability.
Many high ranking generals called for a surge for years, and had there been enough troops early on things would have been far different. Rumsfeld stubbornly refused because he was playing with his 'newer smaller army' game.
Why do you defend this asshole's policy? He was FIRED for it. Things have gone far better since he has been axed. Generals in charge are glad he's gone. Have the honesty to admit the surge at least should have started long ago.
Flame » in reply to Changing course
re: Changing course
The whole thread (31 posts)
- So what's happening in Iraq?
- Democracy? n/t (n/t)
- The disturbing effects of patriotism
- I agree the situation seems encouraging in Iraq.
- re: So what's happening in Iraq?
- Perspective