Kerry criticism is that we relied too much on native troops in Afghanistan and too little on native troops in Iraq.
Actually, we relied too much on native troops in Iraq. Our war plans assumed that significant segments of the Iraqi Army would defect and that we could use those troops to keep the peace, much as the Allies relied upon Japanese Imperial trroops to keep the peace after the Japanese surrender in WWII until we could get Allied troops into Japanese occupied territory. The problem is the two situations were completely different. The Japanese Army had high morale and remained a cohesive force even after the surrender by the Emperor, whereas the Iraqis we were counting upon were supposed to be magically demoralized enough to surrender against their "Emperor's" wishes, while at the same time be motivated enough to keep the peace. How credible an idea was this to be basing our war plans upon it? The looting and chaos that followed the invasion was predictable given our lack of troops, and the failure of the Iraqi Army to do as we counted upon. In both Afghanistan and Iraq, Bush has proven himself unable to wait until we had the necessary forces to do the job properly in place. Had W been president in WW2, the Allied landing at Normandy in 1943 would have failed, because unlike FDR who was persuaded that we needed to wait, Bush has no patience.