I find it strange that the Republicans are defending General Petraeus's plan to secure Baghdad. The last time I checked, George Bush was the President and this guy was a General. Its as if President Bush and his warmongers had absolutely no input and General Petraeus devised this plan on his own. The President's chief conspirators, the AEI institute, printed in a recent article:
"it is premature, to say the least, for armchair generals (ourselves included) to enter a verdict on General David Petraeus' plans to secure Baghdad and enable a political settlement in Iraq"
It seems fairly obvious they recognize that the American people have finally figured out how incompetent and ineffective our current political leaders are at devising military policies. They realize that if the plan is presented as the President's plan, it will be universally viewed as just another foolish plan by a hapless bungler. Which, I might add, is precisely what it is. The other bonus of laying this on the General's lap is that when it fails, as of course it undoubtedly will, the Hapless Bungler in Chief will have a convenient fall guy.
What makes me sick in this case is watching the media lapdogs run after the ball they've been thrown and happily return it to their master time and again. Will no one in the mainstream media ask the questions; whose plan is this anyway? Just how much input did General Petraeus have? Is it General Petraeus's plan because he created it or because it has now been handed to him.
The good General should also look around and observe what this Administration does with people when they no are no longer needed. He best have a plan for six or seven months from now when this thing has completely blown up (no pun intended). Because guess whose plan it will be then?...correct, General Petraeus's plan. Any guesses who the White House will blame for the failure?