Replies

H/T to Belmont Club for pointing to Corn' article:

***********************EXCERPT*********************

David Corn is depressed at the inability or incapacity of Congressional Democrats to discredit the Surge.

****************************snip*********************

See the above posted article

******************************

Corn thinks the "big news" in Petraeus testimony is that there isn't going to be a definite drawdown to pre-Surge levels any time soon. He may wish to consider another candidate for the headline. Admiral Fallon left CENTCOM amid rumor that he and Petraeus had clashed over the subject of how to respond to Iran. A recent spate of articles quoting Petraeus shifting the focus of operations to Iranian and Iranian backed groups suggests that the real context of the Surge and what follows is no longer driven by events in Iraq, but in its Islamic neighbor. That change in emphasis the "real news". Petraeus said in his testimony to Congress:

*****************************snip**************************

It's hard to say what lies ahead. My guess is that Petraeus himself doesn't know how the confrontation with Iran will play out. And that is the fascination with watching events unfold between Maliki and Sadr: it is freighted with information about how all sides (the Iraqi government, Iran and the Coalition) are going to deal with this conflict. Interestingly enough, Petraeus has explicitly mentioned the role of the "Lebanese Hezbollah" in training Sadr's men. This suggests that Petraeus regards the problem in theater-wide or regional terms, not simply as a problem that is confined to Iraq.

Corn seems to think that the proper role of the Democratic Congressmen was to discredit or attack the Surge. I would have thought their first duty was to listen to Petraeus and think about America's strategic choices in the region. But then it's 2008 and we all know what that year signifies.

And there is this:

Spy photos reveal 'secret launch site' for Iran's long-range missiles

Watched both the Senate and the HR with Petraeus and Crocker as well the the Senate Arms Ways and Means Committee with Gates and Mullins.
By far the later was more informative and even Kennedy asked reasonable questions for a change. I continue to be amazed at how ill informed some of the house are regarding the over all Iraqi issue(s). And the stupidest questions come from some of the bozos on the left.