Tommy Franks--Satirist? 

Tommy Franks--Satirist?

Instapundit reports that retired General Franks' book is doing very well, and it should be getting more media attention. Perhaps the problem is that Franks actually supports Bush in some of the main controversies about the Iraq war? For example, on WMDs: Franks says first that leaders of both Jordan and Egypt said there were WMDs in Iraq; and secondly he (Franks) has no regrets about playing a role in deposing Saddam.

Is there any chance that the dubious regimes in Jordan and Egypt were happy to see the U.S. take out Saddam? That they were willing to repeat some of the silly Chalabi crap about weapons in order to bring this about? Wouldn't an intelligent person like Franks realize "Jordan and Egypt" are a very thin reed for evidence about WMDs?

Bush critics focus on another part of Franks' book: the description of meetings that were allegedly to plan the various phases of the Iraq war. Phase III was the shooting war; Phase IV was everything that came after, or was supposed to come after, or would have come after if there were any planning. Which there wasn't.

Matthew Yglesias has the best line. After showing just how little real discussion there was, Yglesias says:

Um . . . I've been in meetings about whether or not to include the phrase "no one would want an alcoholic president, for example" in an article that featured more substantive discussion than that. Here we're talking about an undertaking that the commanding general knew "might well prove more challenging than major combat operations" but all we get is a room full of table nods. Franks said that "well-designed and well-funded reconstruction projects . . . will be the keys to our success," but the administration didn't start budgeting for them until after the war when it became politically convenient. "We will want to get Iraqis in charge of Iraq as soon as possible," said Rumsfeld, but which Iraqis when? No time for that!