How is it a conversation about military strategy in Iraq can happen without the word "oil" ever being mentioned?

Just as importantly, if you allow the opposition to set the agenda, then you shoot down every point the opposition makes, you have still allowed the opposition to set the agenda. Shouldn't the neocons be on the hotseat now? Leadership is what this nation needs.

Many in the media have been fed this agenda about the systemic failures of medical care in the millitary. The problems are a result of:

1. Advances in medicine - too many patients due to better battlefield life saving techniques.

2. Overabundance of bureaucracy.

The numbers of killed and wounded in this war are a fraction of those in previous wars. Not being prepared for large numbers of wounded is unconscionable. They knew that there would be less deaths and more wounded because they created the better life saving methods. That they couldn't put 2+2 together and assume that they would be dealing with more wounded should be called into question by every reporter who covers this story.

The bureaucracy blaming bureaucracy for its failings is like the snake Oroboros who eats his own tail.

Chinook helicopters have two propellers (duel rotor). They are commonly referred to as rotors, but if you go to order the part, you will often find it referred to as a propeller.

An alternative usage of Command Sergeant Major is the senior NCO of a headquarters unit at battalion level or above.

The Apache can be equipped with the M230. Its capacity is 1200 rounds. Its rate of fire is approx. 600 rounds per minute. It can not discharge thousands of rounds in 45 seconds.

Great reporting. I agree the article could have used a round of editing, but I do not agree that the mistake(s) were significant enough to taint the veracity of the author.

Maybe they will consider embedding some reporters in Walter Reed.

It is called keeping the story alive. While the rest of mainstream media moves on 24 hours after a story breaks, others follow up. This piece is news. It is news if someone initiates a high profile Freedom of Information Act request. It will be news if they are denied their request.

"..."No doubt this is a threat to the independent stature that the Justice Department as an institution has enjoyed over the years," said Sam Buell..."

The Justice Department is run by Alberto Gonzales. It was previously run by John Ashcroft. The U.S. Attorneys are appointed by the President.

In what way is this institution separate from the administration?

This is not a rhetorical question. Someone please explain.

"I don't know how to get you to get it through your heads..."

He couldn't have said it better. Every word he puts out is carefully crafted to compel the reporter to frame his article in a certain manner and supporting a certain agenda. These words are literally crafted like advertising copy to stick in the reporters "head" for future retrieval when writing articles. For a long time this word smithing has worked and the lazy press has simply regurgitated the propaganda.

If, for example, the word mismanaged is used consistently with reference to the war, then failure of the war becomes characterized as something that can be corrected with a change of management or change of management tactics. "Management" is not a military term. It should not be used in reference to the status of a conflict.

Unfortunately for the administration, the wordplay is ending and the press is coloring outside the lines with words of their own.

Roofie his drink. He wakes up in Guantanamo. What could be more bi-partisan than that?

"...Any suicide bombing is a terrorist act. It's not an insurgent act. There is no military objective in it."

The person who makes the above statement has no credibility or understanding of warfare. A suicide bombing, just like any other terrorist act, has a clear and definitive military objective. The objective is to elicit and over the top response in retaliation for the act, thus unifying the people who are the recipients of the response against the aggressor. See: Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers. It is designed to convert the fence sitters into taking a side. The suicide bomber is almost always presented as a civilian. This leads to a blur between civilian and combatant. This in turn leads to a reaction on the part of occupying troops to not distinguish between "terrorist" and civilian. This is also by design. See: My Lai/ Haditha. Our troops, government officials, and press are mostly confined to the Green Zone in Baghdad. This is the result of suicide bombings. In that we don't even control the streets of the country that we supposedly occupy, I would say the military objective of terrorism is working just as it should and to great advantage of the insurgents.

Pouring over the web sites of insurgents and Jihadis to gain information, is tantamount to reading Fox news online, and the whitehouse.gov for information on America's military objectives. It tells you absolutely nothing but what a propagandist would want you to hear.

Mr. Kohlmann makes a clear separation between Bathist insurgents an Al-Qaida, but fails to see that the Iraqi Sunni insurgency has been allowing foreign jihadis to exist in the country to do their bidding, and will eliminate them just as easily to suite their objectives. See: Al Zawahiri.

I would not look to Mr. Kohlmann for any advice on what to do militarily in Iraq as he seems to be in the dark about some clear and fundamental understandings of the situation.