I'll skip the myriad of issues from Bush's "non-political" reflections on 9/11 last night
But instead post this question.
If Iraq really is the "central front on the War on Terror", that our strategy is to "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here", that the War on Terror does indeed "represent the primary idiological struggle of the 21st century", that "this is World War III" etc...
...then why did they execute the war on the cheap and fail to plan for the post Saddam insurgency most experts predicted?
I'm really at a loss as to how people can brush this off as a few mistakes when the price of failure was clear at the start.
Please discuss...
-spence