Rumsfeld Says He Underestimated Level of Violence in Iraq (washingtonpost.com)
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld acknowledged yesterday that he had not expected the level of violence confronting U.S. forces in Iraq, but he stood by his decision to send fewer troops than some Army officials and lawmakers have argued were necessary to stabilize the country.
So, he was wrong, but it was still a good decision? Huh?
“If you had said to me a year ago, ‘Describe the situation you’ll be in today one year later,’ I don’t know many people who would have described it — I would not have — described it the way it happens to be today,” he said.
OK, so he didn’t bother to read the seventeen volumes that would have told him exactly this situation would occur. Think he could have asked for a summary? Or listened to the people who had read it?
“Everyone is, at this point, realizing that when everybody said this will be a period during which we will be tested a lot, this is what it meant,” said a senior Rumsfeld aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be more candid. “How it would unfold, I don’t think anyone knew.”
This is like the standard Bush admin excuse, well, no one knew. Hell, people knew, people told you, and you ignored them. Don’t say you didn’t know, just admit you didn’t really care.
No Responses