I think it's a mistake to compare a battle from WWII to a current conflict and try to say that one was a bigger screw up then the other.
The mistake with Iraq has nothing to do with soldiers lost and everything to do with economic and diplomatic cost.
Edit:
Plus, the article is from a conservative think tank. Just about anything coming from a self-styled "think-tank" is prejudicial at best.
Last edited by llama64; 02-01-2008 at 01:14 PM.
|