::::::::
Recent articles and letters from Republicans in support of the idiot in chief and his war indicate that the writers are largely uninformed about (or willfully ignoring) certain facts concerning General Petraeus and Bush’s "surge".
President Bush branded as "disgusting", a MoveOn ad critical of his hand picked stooge, General David "Buttkiss" Petraeus. As expected, the right-wing cool-aid sippers are all shouting "Amen!" Before ranting that I’m "off the reservation" by describing the General in such a disrespectful fashion be advised that his current superior officer, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (Cerntcom), lambasted him as a sycophant at their first meeting in Baghdad in March (Asia Times, Sept. 14). Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ass-kissing little chicken-shit" adding, "I hate people like that." Petraeus’ entire history has been one of sucking up to those who could advance his career - he’s known to have expressed interest in a run for the presidency, probably in 2012.
Let’s get real; the surge is Bush’s scheme to rally support from his war-mongering base for the continuation of his war for the enrichment of his cronies in the oil patch (as suggested recently by Alan Greenspan.) It was opposed as futile by Fallon and most active senior military officers in the Pentagon and in Iraq, several of whom resigned rather than be associated with it.
The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that the benchmarks that were supposed to be achieved as a result of the surge were largely not realized, yet Petraeus reported "encouraging progress".
General Petraeus was charged not only with managing the hail-Mary escalation, but to report on whether he succeeded in producing the miraculous turn-around desired. Given General Petraeus’ ambitious nature does anyone seriously believe that he would jeopardize his future aspirations by reporting his own failure?
