2003-03-31T06:48:00.000-08:00

A couple of days ago, Lt. Gen. William Wallace of the Army V Corps, effectively the commander of US troops in Iraq, told the press "This enemy is different from the one we wargamed against" This lends credence to the assertion of many that the US/UK coalition grossly underestimated the will of the Iraqi people to fight. As short as two weeks ago, VP Cheney was saying that war would be quick" weeks rather than months". The US public was flooded with propaganda that the Iraqi military was so demoralized that it would not fight " for a dying regime" . That hasn't been the case.

As any student of military doctrine would know, it is always Standard Operating Procedure to always refrain from underestimatign your enemy, a cardinal sin. Not only is this a bad tactic militarily, it does a great disservice to the enemy and throws in the face of the notion of honorable combat. This shows the utter contempt and disdain the Bush administration has for the Iraqi people, to think that a people under invasion would not fight for their homeland.

Moreover it raises a greater question about the "laptop bombers" which are running this administration. These neocons are eager to send off our young kids to die in the battlefields of Iraq, and rest assured that their own are safe. Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, even Bush, have never seen bloody combat nor will they. It is the military who fights this war, and thus it is they who should be left in charge of the conflict. In the last few days, charges that Rumsfeld is "micromanaging" the war have surfaced. He meanwhile has vigorously denied this.

Last month, Gen Eric Shinseki, Chief of Army Staff, told Congress that a couple of hundred thousand troops would be needed. Rumsefeld and Fleischer shot him down, one "senior administration official" calling it bullshit from a Clintonite. Now, Shinseki is an honorable and valiant American who served the US well, and is a decorated Vietnam vet. Hurling libelous insults at such a man is dead wrong; involing him in petty political partisanship is irresponsible.

Well now it is proving that the General was right. Many retired generals, among them NATO Commander Wesley Clark, have blasted Rumsfelds decision to send so few troops, less than half the number in the last Gulf war. [Rumseld it seems is distancing himself from the war, saying that this is Tom Franks' war] Interestingly enough, Fox News's "cheerleaders"(thats how the WSJ referred to them in a recent piece analyzing media coverage of the war) have dismissed Gen Clarks complaints by saying that this is mere political fodder from a man planning on running for Pres in 04.

World Affairs