Rummy, not Romney. If I got that wrong before (wouldnt be the forst time) then whoops for me.
#1 thats the problem relying on this sort of crew but that was the dem's idea to begin with.
#2 they were trained but its different in treal life also refer to #1
# 3 like I said RUmmy had to reconfigure our military on the fly, and he did it
#4 the enemy WAS trhe populace, insurgents, including Hussein's Republican Guard. nobody anticipated this but once they sorted it out things were rapidly reconfigured.
if you understood what they guy did you would be amazed.
No, if you were talking about Rumsfeld...I'm the one that has always twisted that around to Romesfeld {pronounced it ROMNEY instead of RUMMEY} my bad
Here's an interesting place to read the 'INS & OUTS' of the BUSH & Company ideologies about Iraq.
<source for this article>
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_rationales_for_war_in_Iraq
Bush administration rationales for war in Iraq From SourceWatch
The
Bush administration rationales for war in Iraq just continue to continue.
Most recently, on August 30, 2005, "standing against a backdrop of the USS Ronald Reagan, the newest aircraft carrier in the Navy's fleet," President
George W. Bush "
answered growing antiwar protests ... with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq:
protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists.
A little more than a week earlier, while
speaking to the national convention of
Veterans of Foreign Wars in Salt Lake City, Utah, "Bush again
linked the Iraq war with efforts to protect the United States from another
September 11-style attack -- a link critics say is an attempt to shift the
justification for war."
Earlier in the day, while meeting "briefly with reporters aboard Air Force One,
Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman subbing for
Scott McClellan,
said that President Bush believes that those who want the U.S. to begin to change course in Iraq do not want America to win the overall '
war on terror'."
[1]
"For political reasons, the president has a
history of silence on America's war dead," Maureen Dowd
wrote August 24, 2005. "But he finally mentioned them on Monday [August 22nd] because it became politically useful to use them as a rationale for war - now that all the other rationales have gone up in smoke.
"'We owe them something,' he told veterans in Salt Lake City (even though his administration tried to shortchange the veterans agency by $1.5 billion). 'We will finish the task that they gave their lives for.'
"What twisted logic: with no W.M.D., no link to 9/11 and no democracy, now we have to keep killing people and have our kids killed because so many of our kids have been killed already? Talk about a vicious circle: the killing keeps justifying itself," Dowd said.
Other Rationales
The Bush administration "used 27 rationales for war in Iraq ... all floated between Sept. 12, 2001, and Oct. 11, 2002," according to Devon M. Lario in her 212-page senior honors thesis at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign:
[2]
"Uncovering the Rationales for the War on Iraq: The Words of the Bush Administration, Congress and the Media from September 12, 2001, to October 11, 2002." Additionally, "all but four of the rationales originated with the administration of President
George W. Bush," Andrea Lynn, Humanities Editor of the
news bureau at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign reports.
[3]
**********************************
Interesting the amount of water under this bridge seems to have softened the rhetoric that the 'SUPPORTERS' of this ideology either ignored by choice or just don't WANT TO REMEMBER...but with his lies and fear tactics I found myself voting for him in 2004. And that will live with me for the rest of my life...how I as an adult bought into his 'fear mongering/B.S. and the lies that have now cost some 4,500 human lives; not counting the number of walking/non ambulatory wounded that will have forever changed lives from this conflict 
