There was a measure of gloating in the administration for the fall of Saddam's regime and criticism of "retired Generals embedded in TV studios." The bulk of the criticism was the fact that there were not enough ground troops and that supply lines were stretched.

Two things: the outbreak of lawlessness and the reluctance of the miliraty to assume a policing posture indicates poor planning. We've been through this before in Haiti, Kosovo, Bosnia, etc. The other thing is that people are saying, including Dana Priest, Washington Post's star intelligence writer, that there are not enough ground troops to set up check points to prevent the escape of regime leaders and Baath party officials.

I think the criticisms of the plan were well founded. Again, the point was not that the plan was a bad plan, but that it was not the bext plan and had some mistaken assumptions.