From The Atlantic’s very experienced military and strategy reporter Robert Kaplan, who has reported on assignment for the magazine from Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Latin America, and the United States, and is author of several books including Imperial Grunts (2005), and Balkan Ghosts: A Journey Through History, we learn things about Genenral Petreaus that GeorgeMoronSoros.Org doesn’t care to tell us.
The idea that General Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker are front men for the administration is ludicrous. Until he took the job as overall ground commander in Iraq, Petraeus was a favorite of liberal journalists: the Princeton man who enjoyed the company of the media and intellectuals, so much so that he was vaguely distrusted by other general officers who envied the good ink he received. (my emphasis) As for Crocker, he is a hard-core Arabist, a professional species that I once wrote a book about: He is the least likely creature on earth to buy into neoconservative ideas about the Middle East. Neither of these men are identified with the decision to go to war. If I had to bet, I’d say that Crocker especially would have been against it, like his other Arabist colleagues. Thus, these men have no personal stake in proving the president right. They and their staffs are much more likely to provide a balanced analysis of the reality in Iraq than senators and congressmen looking over their shoulders at opinion polls and future elections. As Petraeus said, “I wrote this testimony myself,” meaning, the White House had nothing to do with it. Watching them brief Congress Monday, I came away convinced that they made a better impression on the public than anyone else in the room.
The heinous lies and the NYT attack-ad put forward by the Leftwing lost-cause doomsayers, including Hillary The Beast Clinton with her nasty little “willing suspension of disbelief” lawyerese quip, is as ridiculously inane as the brain-fried Truthers who’s thick and viscous insanity is that 9/11 was an inside job and that steel and concrete buildings can’t burn.
Probably the two most interesting statements in Petraeus’s report will get little coverage. First, that the data analysis he used to brief Congress was found by two intelligence agencies to be the best available on the Iraq war, and that reenlistment rates of troops in Iraq are above average: 130 percent among younger enlistees and 115 percent among those in mid-career. Those statistics constitute telling evidence that the troops themselves continue to find great meaning in their work, suggesting that they certainly don’t believe the cause is lost.
This doesn’t fit with their only past experience, losing the Vietnam war. Betrayal is their chief weapon, and with their inverted psychology they project the same message as they purport to fear, one that is intimate with their own designs and actions. Their continued effort remains to lose this war – it’s all the strategy they have to go by – and that old experience continues to be their motivation. And only through defeat can their twisted psyches experience fulfillment, only through the repetition of failure can they find hope – and retain Power.