It is conjecture, I never said it wasn't.  But it's certainly not a conspiracy theory, whereas I don't know about demands to face "facts" that "elitist foreign policy planners along with the military were chomping at the bit".  That's a lot of people you've included in that statement.  I think we can agree that the PNAC people, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, et al were chomping at the bit, it's pretty well in the public record.  I don't think you can make the same claim about the entire military brass.

I was just trying to point out a different way of looking at it to consider.  My only "proof" that this is happening is comes from Sy Hersh's book, Chain of Command.  He describes, through Pentagon and other sources, an absolute zeal and determination on the part of Rumsfeld and his office to do things their way, fully supported by the President.  The military leaders seemed basically to be completely taken aback and caught off guard by the Administration's attitude, which source after source in the book describe as one that has never existed in the White House before... a complete disrespect for the existing military community and their methods.  The response of the military commanders that he presents includes some of what I am talking about, and also includes downright failure.  He specifically describes the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff office as objecting to the plans, but not forcefully enough.  And he describes how in the Joint Staff office, over the first years of the administration, Rumsfeld replaced critics with yes-men and zealots in the cause.

He also describes various people around the edges of the invasion planning and implementation as trying, in different ways, to mitigate the damage.  I'm not saying they have been effective, and I'm not arguing that obstruction is the right or only way for the military to deal with what is happening.  All I'm saying is that these people are just that, people, and most of them are trying to do as best they can within the framework that they know.  It's not an excuse, it's an explanation....

I don't know any of the high-level military people currently at the Pentagon or in command positions.  But I do know high-level military people who used to be at the Pentagon, and I know something about the culture and the kinds of things that tend to concern the these folks.

They are, by and large, not hawks eager to rush into full-scale wars.  They believe the military should be lavishly funded, equipped and prepared to go to war, and they are by no stretch of the imagination pacifists.  They believe in the use of force where warranted, but they absolutely hate the idea of a half-assed military operation, which is what Iraq, and Afghanistan, for that matter, have been.  My guess is the question of going to Iraq at all was not their biggest beef with the administration, their beef is with the operation and with Rumsfeld, who has micromanaged the operations according to pie-in-the-sky military and political theories that have not (surprise, surprise) worked.

The thing is, I basically agree with you.  The military commanders have failed, and continue to fail today.  I just think these are human failings, not demonic ones.

You'll note that I post anonomously and reveal very little personal information, and I'm still worried.  I post here at my own peril.

I know plenty of senior leaders in the Army who are pissed about Iraq.  But, if you speak out, you get canned and replaced by a true believer.