I like this comment at the end of the article:  At the same time, Congress and all of us must call Bush out on his hostage-taking. We must name it for what it is and frame it truthfully. The tragedy of the Iraq occupation continues because the president holds our troops hostage on foreign ground. The deaths are ours to mourn, but Bush's to answer for.

Definition of hostage:  a person (a soldier) given or held as security for the fulfillment of certain conditions or terms, promises (OIL), etc., by another (Bush)

That's how I'm going to describe it for now on --

Bush is holding our troops hostage on foreign soil!

This is the Iraqi Hostage Crisis. 

No Hostages for Oil!

from Admiral Fallon, CENTComm commander (see my post right above yours).  So, although I agree with you that this is Bush's war, I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to accept everything Petraeus says at face value, even if he had candid moments this week.  I think that he is presenting the facts as he sees them, but as it is with our medical care for a very serious illness, it is best to get a second opinion.
 

I'm not advocating taking anything at face value from this General.  His objectivity is obviously compromised.  His independence non-existent.

Mike Gravel said that this so-called Petraeus report could have been written years ago.  Were there any surprises?  No!  It's just another highlighted chapter in the ever-expanding book known as "The Big Lie".

that a flag officer like Fallon would have used the chickensh*t language. Are you kidding? I grew up with a general and was married to one, and that word was probably cleaned up for public consumption as it is. I understand the Admiral also called the general a sycophant, and I think he got that right, too. Once an officer reaches colonel, any further promotion becomes in some measure political, and this case is no different.

And what about the suspect statistics in the General's wonderful Powerpoint? These were seriously jiggered as is the custom of the White House and Bushites in general--- shot in the face doesn't count, shot in the back of the head does, car bomb deaths don't count, and so on. The truth is, the body count is higher every month of this year compared to the same month last year, is it not?

Moreover, now we are getting interviews with Abu Ressa, the great tribal leader (so named by Patreaus), who suposedly brought all the Anbar Province Sunni tribes into the American fold. Not so, it seems; they are simply using the Americans to get wads of cash to buy arms which will be used in the upcoming civil war once Americans are no longer a factor--- the cash seen exchanging hands is really quite large. If Anbar is so peaceful how come Abu Ressa was car bombed and killed in his supposedly safe  home territory? 

If the surge is working, how come recent polls find that NO Iraqi even in Baghdad think it's working? If the surge is working, how come the south of Iraq around Basra is having its own Shiite-on-Shiite war for dominance, with the British studiously looking the other way?  How come the Kurds are getting impatient with the Americans?

General Patreaus may believe what he said in the report, but he clearly is on a leash. Kabuki indeed. Good word to choose, Senator Webb.