These guys (Democrats) have been pushing a complete withdrawal since Murtha first came up with the idea of cut and run. They are afraid of General Petraeus. Now they have realized that if a Democrat is elected President, they will have the daunting task of creating a support Iraq policy or face the inevitable collapse of stability in the Middle East, along with the global political, diplomatic and economic consequences. They don't want to be blamed for the collapse, but they have been pushing for since the war started. Additionally, by shifting the focus on Afghanistan there is a better cost- benefit of failure in consensus, blame and economics through NATO. It's time for the voters to place an adult agenda in Congress, one where the representatives take responsibility for their actions and support a summum bonum agenda instead of let them eat cake.

Mr Stone, you hit the nail right on the head!

Dems are great at using their who*** in the press to pre empt stories they don't like by blanketing the airwaves with a message to destroy the following message.

Cowards and liars.

With the recently reported cease fire recognized by Al Sadr, plus his recent claim to being called back to his "education" under guidance from his father; plus his earlier statements on the success of the coalition troops over his gang (militia)in their separation suggestion of inevitable defeat. Plus, his recent loss of followers(with families) once they grew tired of the fighting and recognized life changes for the better in Iraq( was lost in the mainstream media, however). So found this which might help explain a misreported plan for present success in Iraq:

Retired Major William "Mac" McCallister spent more than four years in Iraq, much of it as an adviser to the Marines on Iraq's tribes and culture. Here's how Mac sees the recent Maliki-Sadr clash:

1. Fighting is a form of negotiation to gain an advantage and not necessarily to gain control of a given situation. Maliki government perceives an opportunity to gain advantage due to weakening of Organization of Martyr Sadr (OMS).

2. On the other hand do not discount the likelihood that IA [Iraqi Army] are targeting rogue JAM [Jaysh al-Mahdi, Sadr's militia] units that failed to rally to Sadr in the last 6 months. A number of reports implied that one to the reasons Muqtada al Sadr initiated the cease fire was to verify loyalty of JAM militias to OMS. Those that did not respond may well be the "target audience". If this is the case then I am inclined to believe that Maliki and Muqtada al Sadr are in communication to "manage the violence".

3. The timing for this punitive expedition is about right. The "awakening" meme [tribal resistance to extremist, which began in Iraq's west] has infected Arab tribes in the south. Arab tribes that happen to Shia. Many southern tribal leaders have openly expressed their "disappointment" with OMS and rogue militias for a while now, due to their inability to "fix" economic and security conditions. The tribes are a powerful lobbying group, especially in the south since most are engaged in agriculture. Agriculture translates into "power" since you have to feed the cities.

Conclusion. This is a punitive expedition only. The short-term objective is to assist Sadr in ridding himself of rogue elements so as to make him a more stable long-term political partner and more reliable participant in governance. The Maliki government, although it seeks to consolidate its hold on power knows it can not do so without the help of Sadr. The intermediate objective is to maintain Sadr as a viable and potential political ally for he is needed against the numerous groups also seeking greater influence such as Fadilah, Hakim family, Sunni tribes and the Kurds. The long-term objective will be determined as this thing plays itself out.

There are those, however; that would want to see a failure in what could be considered a very powerful truce and another success in Iraq. ..Al-sadr pretty much said publicly that they have lost their war..they underestimated our troops.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Steny H. Hoyer Richard J. Durbin, Ike Skelton, Carl Levin, Howard Berman, Joseph R. Biden Jr.,Silvestre Reyes, John D. Rockefeller IV, John Murtha, Daniel K. Inouye, Nita Lowey, Patrick J. Leahy and their "factoid deficient" media still seek to promote and secure A White Flag Loss in Iraq; which I find unpatriotic no matter what hierarchical relationship in named leadership they so chair; or in the case of the media, some twisted sense of citizen-free guidelines he or she aspires to in regard to under so called journalistic integrity.

There is fact, there is fiction. The failure, by all of the above in their purposeful neglect of truth in reporting are criminals in that they share in profiteering (campaign donations, job status) through their self-serving destructive acts a/k/a or political propaganda.

Isn't the problem that 70% percent of Americans are demanding a change of course and the president has decided to go down with ship neocon—what choice did he have?

I find this to be an extremely take on the situation. If, in fact, al-Sadr is communicating with the Maliki government in a coordinated effort to bring the rogue "malitias" under control, that would point to even more progress by Gen. Petraeus than has been reported. The MSM and their backers, the Democrats have to be livid by this development. I still see al-Sadr as a key to this situation. Once he achieves Ayatollah status, he will become an even more important player. I see the question here to be what he will do once that is accomplished.