<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(NuShrike @ Nov 10 2006, 02:07 AM) [snapback]346802[/snapback]</div> That's my understanding of the Afghanistan fiasco, as well. Afghanistan was primarily a CIA operation under Tenet. It was so successful (in the beginning) that when it later became necessary for Rumsfeld to send in troops to seal of the Afghanistan border into Pakistan and finish the job, due to Rumsfeld's vanity, jealousy, and preparation for the Iraq invasion, he held off sending troops for at least a month for no other reason. This allowed bin Laden to slip away and the insurgency in Afghanistan to continue and the Taliban to eventually return. Bush then allowed Rumsfeld and the DoD to run roughshod over both the CIA and the State Dept during Operation Iraqi Liberation (you know, OIL) simply because of his close ties with Cheney (the 'Nixon pair') and it's cost the United States (and the Republican party) dearly. Had Rumsfeld been more interested in getting bin Laden than invading Iraq and promoting himself, things would have worked out a lot better.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rudiger @ Nov 10 2006, 11:37 AM) [snapback]346894[/snapback]</div> Yes. This is all documented in the Frontline documentaries "Rumsfeld's War" and "The Dark Side". Just follow my frontline link at the sig. Cheers!