Quote Originally Posted by reed11b View Post
I just read the entire article in the America's Defense Meltdown paper, including endnotes and saw no mention of the 50,000 man Iraq invasion. If you are talking about Tranformation Under Fire, the that was published in '03. Five years ago, again, a lot of evolution in the concept since that time. I agree that language is overstated in the CDI paper, but again, look at the end user. Sound military reasoning is rarely very moving to those in politics, so "the sky is falling" sometimes does.
Reed
No the CDI paper does not use the 50K figure. I refer to that from other works like Cobra II, I am referring to the paper by CDI because that was the paper that Riflemen mentioned and first Ken and then I responded to as a point of discussion on the briefing in question. If you look at the biographies that plan is mentioined as a basis of credibility as below:

In January 2002, Macgregor was directed by the secretary of defense to present the CENTCOM commander with a concept for intervention in Iraq. The plan assumed a no-notice armored attack on two axes and that Iraqi Army and administrative structures would be retained. Though modified
in unfortunate ways, major elements of his concept were adopted
.

Gratefully the ultimate plan included more troops than 50K. Unfortunately the effects of assuming away opposition and turmoil afterward were furtherincreased by the disbanding of the army etc. If an author is going to use hyperbole in selling his points as an author to an audience than he should expect after effects when the audience accepts them and acts on them.

Tom