What if Powell was Secretary of Defense?

[maverick]

Simple enough: what if Colin Powell had been given the Secretary of Defense rather than the Secretary of State?

How does this change the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

The Powell Doctrine (overwhelming force; use as many men as possible) is obviously better than the Rumsfeld doctrine (network centric, send as few men and material as humanly possible:rolleyes:)...does this help the war in Iraq to be won earlier, with more troops to secure the country and the border and to stop the entry of fundamentalists from throughout the world?

[Torqumada]

The invasion of Iraq may not even happen. The machinations that lead to Iraq were a Cheney-Rumsfeld double team and they had been planning for that since 1998. Colin Powell was never a member of the PNAC. Afghanistan will probably be better planned with more troops and supplies.

Torqumada

[Inferus]

The invasion of Iraq is carried out under proper circumstances. There are enough soldiers to not only win the war but also provide security, rebellious Iraqi elements are included, and the infiltration of al Queda is quite unlikely. Powell wasn't an idiot. He knew that not only was overpowering force necessary but also a large force was needed to occupy afterward to ensure stability afterward for a new government to take place. Unlike Rumsfeld, who had no military experience, Powell had served as an army commander and knew the importance of troops on the ground. Put enough men in Iraq and we would be in a much better situation than we are now. It was Rumsfeld's view of a quick, cheap war that led to the quagmire we are in now.

[Berra]

The Powell Doctrine (overwhelming force; use as many men as possible) is obviously better than the Rumsfeld doctrine (network centric, send as few men and material as humanly possible:rolleyes:)...

I think it is the other way around. Rumsfeld war is better, it brought a quick victory in Afganistan and turned it into a managable occupation, in terms of losses, of Afganistan. Not a bad result when you look at the Afgan history. More foots on the ground would only lead to more bodys in body bags. Instead, they worked with locals, quite sucessful.

The war on Iraq, as opposed to the occupation was a stunning sucess. What failed was the working with the locals part. For example, they disbanded the Iraqi army. An they did not take their unpopularity into account. That wouldn't change with more boths on the ground.

[maverick]

I hadn't considered that...

But was the decision of disbanding the Iraqi army and other similar decisions part of the policies of Defense, State or the Presidency itself?

I was thinking that more troops could assure that the borders are secured and that there's no massive infiltration of fundamentalists through Iran and Syria...

Back to topic...If Powell goes to Defense, who gets the Secretary of State?