quote:
Originally posted by whomod:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave the Wonder Boy:
QUOTE]Again, we did not anticipate a geurilla war in Iraq following the war. NO ONE in the military (not just the Bush administration) seemed to anticipate this.

I'm late to work so I just wanted to highlight something that boggled the mind.
[yuh huh] :lol:
Add me to the list of the boggled.

quote:

The request for U.N. assistance still means that the United States will still provide virtually ALL of the financial and military needs of Iraq. It's only to symbolically show that it's an internationally endorsed effort, and not an American colonization, and appease Democrats in the Senate and Congress who have insisted on requesting international assistance.
Another boggler!

So, you're saying that after avoiding a UN Security Council vote which would have rejected an invasion of Iraq by the US and the UK, the US now wants to have that symbolic nod.

Which France has specifically said it won't get.

This assertion is pure spin. What do you say to to the alternative explanation, that the US is seeking UN help of, say, 20,000 troops to supplement its force in circumstances where reserves won't sign on for a second tour?

I don't understand why it gags in the throat to concede that the US is seeking UN assistance for genuine and positive reasons, such as having Muslim peacekeepers, other then obtaining the suddenly necessary "symbology" of UN approval - which, natch, is all the Democrats' fault anyway.