The U.S. Army has released a study that states that leaders in the United States were more concerned with winning the military battle in Iraq than what to do once it was concluded. That's not exactly earth-shattering news, since most of us already know that, but the historical report is interesting because it's the first major report issued by U.S. military criticizing civilian leaders. The study, "On Point II: Transition to the New Campaign" was written by Donald Wright and Col. Timothy R. Reese, along with the Army's Contemporary Operations Study Team, according to a Washington Post article. They say U.S. commanders lacked a realistic vision of what Iraq would look like after that triumph, according to the story. "The transition to a new campaign was not well thought out, planned for, and prepared for before it began," wrote Wright and Reese. "Additionally, the assumptions about the nature of post Saddam Iraq on which the transition was planned proved to be largely incorrect." ...more

June 30, 2008

Occasionally I write guest columns for Highlands Today. I enjoy writing and research my subject(s) thoroughly. Nonetheless, opinion articles are located on the opinion page for a reason. I honor a person's right to present their views in the public forum, and I thoroughly enjoy it when others comment about my writing whether their comments are positive or negative. I often learn from such comments. For example, Randy Ludacer criticized a couple of items in my column. Mr. Ludacer's words of criticism were respectful and backed up with opinions of merit. I learned from Mr. Ludacer's insightful comments. I will not, however, permit anyone to slander my character without an appropriate response. ...more

December 21, 2007