Posted 1/13/2005 05:26:00 PM by Douglas

The squabbling between military advisers in the Department of Defense and the actual military isn't anything new, but this article takes squabbling to a whole new level.

In the movies, it’s usually the military eager for war and combat, and the civilians and the defense department pressing for restraint. But it hasn’t been that way with the war in Iraq.

Long before President Bush gave the orders, using force to topple Saddam was a glint in the eye of the civilians who would become key players in the Bush administration.

In 1998, a neoconservative think tank called the Project for the New American Century wrote to President Clinton, “The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to ‘undertake military action.’”

Even the name sounds made up: The Project for the New American Century? Who comes up with a name like that? Oh yeah, those guys. But what does the Army's top brass have to say about them? What does the commander of Iraq's ground forces have to say about the #3 guy at the pentagon?

After leaving Iraq, General Tommy Franks accused Deputy Defense Secretary Douglas Feith of underestimating Iraq’s resistance and described Feith as “The f**ng stupidest guy on the face of the earth.”

But seriously, General, tell us how you really think.

I'm not political strategists, but could this be the sign of, oh, I don't know, maybe something ain't workin' right? Why is it that none of these clowns have even lost their jobs?