join message
Argument: Argument thesis  The Bush administration lost the war in Iraq
Node type: Node supports parent assertion  This node supports its parent
Parent Node: Node refutes parent assertion  Bush won the war but has botched the occupation
Node Text: Army study faults civilian and military leadership

A new Army history of the service's performance in Iraq immediately after the fall of Saddam Hussein faults military and civilian leaders for their planning for the war's aftermath, and it suggests that the Pentagon's current way of using troops is breaking the Army National Guard and Army Reserve.

. . .

"The transition to a new campaign was not well thought out, planned for, and prepared for before it began," write Wright and Reese, historians at the Army's Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. "Additionally, the assumptions about the nature of post-Saddam Iraq on which the transition was planned proved to be largely incorrect."

The results of those errors, they add, were that U.S. forces and their allies lacked an operational and strategic plan for success in Iraq, as well as the resources to carry out a plan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Node Created: Ulysses Berman — 2008-06-30 12:50:25

Return to parent argument




Pending Arguments

There are no pending Arguments.

Create an Argument!