Quote Originally Posted by wm View Post
I am not as clear as to the author's ultimate intent in writing the piece...First, the piece is no longer what the author submitted. As LTC Gentile noted, the editors of the SF Chronicle chose to evoke editorial privilege and gut his 1200 word article. (I have my suspicions about their reasons, and they have nothing to do with an interest by the Chronicle's editors in saving ink and newsprint.)
Simply put my intent for writing the piece was to state my observation that IEDs in Iraq are like artillery in World War I: conditions of those two battlefields that tactical or technological innovations could not completely do away with save a political agreement to end the fighting.

Next I take full responsibility for what i said in that piece. The editor of the paper sent me a revised version with parts taken out and she allowed me to review it make any other changes i wanted as long as i could keep it close to the word limit she had given me. The portions that were taken out to save space did in no way compromise the thrust of the piece. There was no left leaning "moveon.org" motive behind the paper's editor to shorten the piece but only to do just that, shorten it.

Finally, i do believe Iraq is in Civil War and it is more than just an insurgency. I believe it is important to make this point so that we can see the war for what it actually is and devise policy and operational approaches to suit it.