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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mao II who wrote (68894)	10/26/2005 7:13:23 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

I said that if they were capable batallions in the spring, they would still be now. If they were ready in the spring, the latter estimate of only 1 ready was either wrong and requiring explanation the likes of which I don't see, or the former estimate of 3 battalions ready was wrong. If the former estimate of 3 battalions ready was wrong, then there has been no backwards movement. Barring an explanation of how two battalions came to disolve into disorder, I'm left with the third option in which two opinions simply aren't in agreement. Disagreements and opinions abound, but nothing seen here shows that two battalions have fallen from grace into disorder, as it were. Therefore, for now I conclude it must be wrong to say Iraqi troop readiness is going backwards, as was said. Dan B.