More on boots on the ground

Wretchard continues the discussion about troop levels, contingency plans and the fumbled occupation. One sentence struck me immediately. He points to a report issued by the Defence Science Board, in which they state:

But before setting forth its recommendations, it notes with some irony that US forces were historically never designed for occupation and conquest and lack even the conceptual framework with which to approach "the stabilization and reconstruction operations that follow hostilities".

On the completely unrealistic anticipation that Noam Chomsky might ever read this post — Noam, I believe that's your cue. :-)

Any other "imperialist America" adherents or "Rumsfeld should be fired" folks are welcome to chime right in.