Remember the p.r. push to declare that the coalition forces and Maliki were poised to take back Baghdad from the militias this fall? It was hoisted by all the usual Bush apologists during the election campaign, and my suspicion is that it was entirely about the election campaign rather than a genuine desire to seize control of Baghdad, something Rumsfeld refused to do from the day the U.S. forces got there. Now we have some evidence for how empty the gesture really was:
A four-star general who declined to be identified discussing a confidential conversation told of this encounter with Gen. Peter Chiarelli, who was in charge of day-to-day ground operations. "Do you have enough forces? Enough to clear an area and stay there to secure it 24/7?" Chiarelli replied, "Of course not." The four-star recalls replying, "It’s going to fail, it’s absolutely going to fail." The Americans never had enough forces to sweep even half the city, much less secure it.
Just worth knowing the details of the vast chasm between the White House and reality. Now put yourself in the position of an American soldier ordered to do something he doesn’t have the back-up for, in order to provide window-dressing for a re-election campaign. The troops are heroes not just for doing their work, but for doing it under one of the most clueless commanders-in-chief in recent history.
The Dish 