Petraeus Perspectives

Independent minded? Another enabler? Unwilling to be used? Too emotionally involved in the campaign? Just what is Gen. Petraeus?:

John Burns via Froomkin:

"But for General Petraeus, being cast as the president's white knight has been a mixed blessing. While he talks with Mr. Bush once or twice a week, in interviews he depicts himself as owing loyalty as much to Congress as the White House and stresses the downside, as well as the upside, of the military effort here.

"His view, he says, is that he is 'on a very important mission that derives from a policy made by folks at one end of Pennsylvania Avenue, with the advice and consent and resources provided by folks at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. And in September, that's how I'm going to approach it.' Whether to fight on here, he says, is a 'big, big decision, a national decision,' one that belongs to elected officials, not a field general."

It's also possible Petraeus realizes he may be being set up for a fall by the White House.

Or .... Paul Krugman:

Paul Krugman observed in his New York Times column last month: "I hope he proves me wrong, but the general's history suggests that he's another smart, sensible enabler.

"I don't know why the op-ed article that Petraeus published in The Washington Post on Sept. 26, 2004, hasn't gotten more attention. After all, it puts to rest any notion that the general stands above politics: I don't think it's standard practice for serving military officers to publish opinion pieces that are strikingly helpful to an incumbent, six weeks before a national election."

My guess is that the White House will manipulate the report significantly, spinning the language and influencing Petraeus's testimony, if he even gives any. I'm also going to predict that the short version of the report is that "things are bad but much much better since the escalation surge". They're be a recommendation for a small drawdown of some forces by spring that will get huge headlines but will not change the situation in Iraq materially.

In short, the report will be right down the middle and indecisive. Both anti-war and pro-war advocates will be able to claim victory and the whole thing will fall right back into Congress's lap to either let it continue or to stop it. Congress won't have the votes to stop it and the war will continue, a defacto victory for the pro-war side.