I can’t tell whether or not you’re being sincere, mainly because I think what you’re asserting about the effect of the Saddam execution makes little sense. I don’t think these insurgents care one iota about Saddam. They’re fighting our efforts there because we are the infidel occupiers, and they will fight us until we are gone.

All bets are off if/when we leave. Chances are, Iran will move into the messy void ceated by the absence of Saddam. Saddam committed many atrocities of an inexcusable nature, yet he had something that we’ll be hard pressed to replicate anytime soon; a stable nation equiped to defend itself from enemies like Iran. I feel like all we’ve really accomplished is akin to kicking down a wasps nest i.e. agitated the hell out of a relentless group.

P.S., let’s not forget that Saddam came to power by our support, and was our ally early on, mainly because of Iran and our desire to have a counterbalance to Iranian goals.

That’s OK, but it’s not the same thing as reading the book. It’s a BIG book, and he could only have presented little slices of it on C-Span.

As far as Thomas Ricks is concerned I have watched his three/four presentations on C-span.
First thing he said that was telling was that only 1/3 of the commanders cared. 1/3 of commanders just wanted to kill. 1/3 didn’t have the training. also, if you can’t protect the people in an
insurgency instead just protect yourself that is the problem. So if the military doesn’t have correct tactics obviously you are going to have fiasco. US didn’t have a insurgency school until one general set one up in Iraq. but that won’t help if you don’t protect your allies. All the professional people will leave the country.
Obviously arrogance blinded the US but divide and conquer tactic was used as well. Once that happen it is hard to put things back together. This will insure presence of US troops in the region.
Only thing complicates this is that Iran has other plans.

Re Custer, General Grant had a low opinion of Custer, partly (as I recall) anyone in Custer’s command would be killed or wounded eventually, with 100 percent certainty. He was a damn reckless fool in the Civil War and remained so afterward.

Re “In my opinion that current chaos is that plan and every one keep complaining that they didn’t plan.” Read the Thomas Ricks book “Fiasco.” It will open your eyes.

The guy who wrote “Indian Yell” gave a talk on the book in C-span yesterday in which he praised Custer as youngest general and one that never lost a battle in civil war and he travelled all the way back to washington to complain about fake supplies sent to his soldiers.

Also, maha, What you need to have a though exercise with your readers about “If you were the president and wanted to have permanent occupation of Iraq and control of Oil, how would you plan that”. In my opinion that current chaos is that plan and every one keep complaining that they didn’t plan.

BTW, does anyone know how to render “Little Cowboy Boots” into Latin?

The troops were not properly equipped, but it wasn’t his fault because the equipment to fight underwater wasn’t invented yet, and a couple of thousand years later, the equipment to fight a war against water has still not been invented.

I suspect, though, that both campaigns succeeded in their real goals while failing utterly on the surface.