The plan was criticized by some retired military officers embedded in TV studios. But with every advance by our coalition forces, the wisdom of that plan becomes more apparent.

The remark is associated with the early phase of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, when the Bush administration was defending Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s relatively “light footprint” war plan against criticism that more troops were needed. Cheney’s reference to “retired military officers embedded in TV studios” points to the prominent role of television commentary during the opening weeks of the war, when retired generals and admirals—often presented as analysts—debated the pace of the advance, supply-line vulnerabilities, and the risk of urban fighting. Cheney frames battlefield progress as vindication of the administration’s planning and as a rebuttal to media-amplified dissent.

Cheney contrasts armchair criticism—specifically from retired officers serving as television analysts—with the apparent validation that comes from battlefield results. The remark implies that media commentary can be detached from operational realities and that success on the ground is the proper metric for judging strategy. It also functions rhetorically as a defense of the administration’s war planning: each reported “advance” is framed not merely as tactical progress but as evidence that the overall plan was sound. The line thus blends a critique of televised expertise with an argument for trusting executive decision-making during wartime.