Quote:
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Jun 18 2003, 01:00 PM
Contemporary language question - if pointing out that claims by the Administration of knowledge of Iraqi WMD were the primary reason for war makes one a "historical revisionist", what does suggesting that more troops used in the "initial combat" phase would have resulted in better control of the country make one?
|
How about the recently retired General Shinseki who got ripped to shreds by Rumsfeld and others because he said it would take about 200,000k + troops to keep the peace in Iraq. Smart guy, and he took a nice parting shot at Rumsfeld on the way out!!
