Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve dietrich who wrote (651206)	10/25/2004 4:05:33 PM
From: JDN	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

As you know, we had less troops there then we probably should have had. Remember when Turkey refused us the opportunity to run troops through there? This substantially reduced the number of troops we could get on the scene at once, not to mention the resistance was far lighter then we expected and we reached Baghdad much quicker then we thought we would. As I said in my post earlier, "You do what you got to do". IMHO the oil lines etc were far more important then the underground munitions bunkers to Iraq's future (note none of the oil was put afire as was feared). Add to that, the thought that the resistance was basically over, I can see where the commander on the scene allocated his troops as best he felt fit. Hindsight is always great, especially in War. jdn