Why did we go into Iraq?

[lookout123]

Rumsfeld overrode his generalss recommendations for overwhelming numbers.

some truth to this, but more accurately he caved to the generals in some regards (tactics) but still tried to keep his own view in place (strategy). the two were working from completely different starting points, so in the end you get FUBAR.

Rumsfeld and some of the senior military leadership belong to the school of thought that Col. John Boyd (USAF ret) spent his life developing, preaching, teaching, and cramming down everyone's throats. (ever hear of the OODA loop?) Boyd was the man behind the strategy for Gulf War I.

the basic idea is that you don't need overwhelming numbers to defeat an enemy, rather approach the enemy as water running down a hill. give most of the control to the people at the lowest level to do what needs to be done, sweep through an area, destroy any resistance, and move on to the next - QUICKLY. pockets of strong resistance should not hold up the momentum of the main force. surround them, cut them off with a smaller amount of assets, crush them into rubble if necessary, but move on quickly. only combat troops enter the fray - REMFs and soft personnel need not apply.

in this way, a small number of combatants can defeat much larger enemy forces.

things that weren't addressed: 1) to this day, only the marines have decided that everyone in their uniform must learn this and live this. a majority of the army and air force senior leadership cringe at the mention of Boyd. 2) this strategy requires a willingness to destroy the enemy, not just disarm and discourage them. 3) this strategy only deals with the battle plan, occupation of a nation requires more police, civil engineers, etc.

rumsfeld attempted to prosecute this war using Boyd's method without broadbased support from senior army leadership (who also effed it up in Gulf War I). this is something even Tommy Franks bitched about at the time - the Jt Chiefs were trying to get involved and scratch out their own territories. if everyone is not on the same page, you got no chance.

going back over this, it is extremely obvious that Boyd can't be summarized in a post. I recommend a biography that was released a couple of years ago simply titled, BOYD.

here is an article by one of his acolytes immediately following the war.

This has plenty of info and good links to keep you busy for days, possibly weeks.