Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by derby (3342) on 2003.09.08 8:07 (#24000)
    a war that had clearly already been well planned in advance

    Isn't that the whole point of the Department of Defense. I hope they have plans well in advance for a boat load of scenarios - from the most apparent (religous extremism, cult-of-personality fascism) to the riduculous (canadian extremism???). This is exactly what I want my tax money spent for - thinking about zillions of scenarios, prioritizing them, and then planning for them.

    I think the DoD does a good job of war planning ... now if they could only figure out how to win the peace after the war ...

    • That certainly is true for the WWII planning that preceeded Pearl Harbour.

      Since many U.S. allies were involved in WWII for years before Pearl Harbour, it would be criminally incompetant to not start making plans for joining in. The administration knew that joining was the right thing to do, but until Pearl Harbour, it would have been political suicide to actually do it.

      That sounds much like the current situation, except that the majority in the rest of the world does not agree with Bush's beliefs of "the

    • Yes. The Taliban was a "hostile government" that aided terrorists for many years, and we knew all about it. We had plans for a long time to attack them. We also have plans for attacks on North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and pretty much every other nation that is "hostile." I shudder to think of what it might entail, but that includes China too.
    • > Isn't that the whole point of the Department of Defense.

      For ten points, discuss why DoD is not called DoA.