# War Could Last Months and Require Considerably More Combat Power, Officers Say **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 27, 2003, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-could-last-months-and-require-considerably-more-combat-power-officers-say/164498 "2003-03-27T11:27:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2003, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-could-last-months-and-require-considerably-more-combat-power-officers-say/164498/61 "2003-03-30T03:51:17Z")
Rumsfeld undermined Powell every chance he got during the UN piece of all this. How a Defense Secretary gets away with shooting his fool mouth off about diplomatic stuff he knows nothing about is beyond me. Now, as **elucidator** ’s link contends, and lots of people suspected anyway, it appears he’s committed the classic modern military blunder of overestimating air power, and the classic Vietnam blunder of going in with less than overwhelming force. To quote from Alan Abelson in this week’s Barron’s, hardly an antiwar rag: "The only surprise in all this is that the suits in the Pentagon, who decided that war was too important to leave to the generals, are surprised. My goodness (or the scatological equivalent) - we can hear the collective exclamation - it looked great and worked like a charm in the computer model! … “The irony is that the Powell Doctrine of bringing overwhelming force to bear, which proved a stunning success in the Gulf War, seemed the perfect template for this one and, as it happens, Mr. Powell himself is right down the hall, had Mr. Rumsfeld deigned to consult him. Rummy, though, has his own notions, and the result was a bit of a messy week for our side in Mesopotomia. What is it about defense secretaries - remember Robert McNamara? - that they’re so hot to play Clausewitz?” The worst part of this is that now it seems Rumsfeld is not only a fool, he’s a weasel. I saw a press conference earlier today where he said the plan came from Tommy Franks and was “washed through” the Joint Chiefs a few times before being approved. Technically true, I’m sure. Technically. On second thought, the worst part of this is that more soldiers and civilians are going to die than would have had the generals been allowed to do their job without the suits getting in the way. And if the war lasts more than a month and this results in chaos spreading through the ME, it’s a failure no matter when the troops march into Baghdad. ---
**Author:** ![MonkeyNo1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MonkeyNo1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MonkeyNo1)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2003, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-could-last-months-and-require-considerably-more-combat-power-officers-say/164498/62 "2003-03-30T19:05:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Urban Ranger \* > \*\*Lets see. > > The 3ID has been 80 miles from Baghdad for days, not making progress. Basra is still in Iraqi hands. Umm Qsar is still not firmly controlled. The coalition supply line is being harassed by Iraqi forces. The number of troops required has been severely underestimated. > > Most importantly, the original plan was going straight for Baghdad. Now they have to change it to “secure Southern Iraq” first. > > That is a failed plan. \*\* Will you quit with the propoganda?! We call it progess. 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-could-last-months-and-require-considerably-more-combat-power-officers-say/164498.md?page=3)