"Out of balance."

Talking about the war in Iraq is an inevitable powder keg for conversation. Certainly lessons can be learned by studying the lead up to the war, if done so by honestly assessing the complexity of the last 5-7 years, and of course without partisan slant. At the moment, Congress (and Washington in general) is strategizing, posturing and maneuvering like mad about how to proceed in Iraq.

In a hearing during last week's House Armed Services committee meeting, Army Chief of Staff George Casey and Army Secretary Pete Geren gave a sobering testimony, summarized here by Congress Daily. A few crucial words from Casey:

"the next several decades will be ones of persistent conflict" and the Army cannot accurately predict when and where the next war will occur, Casey said, "we are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies."

and this, which the original Congress Daily story included:

"We could not, at the present time, respond to a full-spectrum conflict."

It was indeed a sobering testimony, especially given current buzz regarding Iran (would ground troops be necessary to ensure a strike on Revolutionary Guard headquarters and nuclear facilities was thorough?) and an increasingly widespread belief that the U.S. is on an inevitable collision course with China in the coming decades of the 21st century.

Some suggest Iran (and their Syrian allies) are, in fact, shaking in their shoes at the moment - especially given Israel recent strike DEEP in Syrian territory, which took out...what? No one really knows but speculation is all over the map. How deep and veiled was this strike? It sounds like the Israeli Air Force fighter pilots could've landed in Damascus, grabbed a coffee at Starbucks and kept rolling to their target without any Syrian taking notice.

BC