PLAN OF ATTACK
Bob Woodowrd's new book, Plan of Attack has been released. As expected, and as Woodword probably hoped, it is stirring a great deal of controversy. I haven't seen the book yet, and I probably won't until I get home as it's not likely to be available here for a long time (Here's a hint for you: if you're looking for something to send to service members deployed overseas, books are a great idea. Reading is a great way to keep the down time from dragging too much). I have seen some coverage of the book on television and the internet. Much of the controversy seems to center on when planning for the invasion of Iraq began. The book asserts that President Bush decided to go to war in January of 2003, while negotiations and diplomatic options were still being pursued. It also contends that Secretary of State Powell was left out of the decision-making process. Condoleeza Rice denies this. According to Rice, the President decided to pursue the military option in March of 2003. Rice is a political appointee, so her motivation can always be called into question. Woodward, on the other hand, is the darling of the mainstream media. He is also, however the author of a book that was supposedly based on "interviews" that he conducted with former CIA Director William Casey while Casey lay comatose on his deathbed. For me, Woodward is not above reproach.

The truth of the matter is that the onset of planning is irrelevant. Anyone who has served in the military in any capacity that involves operational planning will tell you that planning begins well in advance of the decision to move. Often times, planning takes place before a specific need for a military operation is identified. This is called contingency planning. Any senior military staff worth its salt will have a plan at the ready long before the commander calls for one. Bob Woodward, who served as an officer in the US Navy, must know this, but controversy sells books.