Unfortunately, we seem to be trapped in some sort of impossible Escher-inspired world, with corners, hallways and stairways that lead nowhere -- and everywhere -- at the same time.

I'm sure that all of the soldiers who are putting their lives on the line every single day in Iraq will have no problem waiting for the next President, since Congressional Republicans seem completely unwilling to pull their thumbs out of their asses.

Petraeus might be able to answer it then. "How much more dangerous is this invasion making it for Americans?"

I doubt he'd care how much more dangerous it's made things for Iraqi citizens.

Bush and the GOP punk'd Congress, the Democrats, and the country as a whole. They got away with it, too, although I think they'll pay dearly for it in 2008. Please, let the Democrats ditch Harry Reid as their leader in the Senate. He sucks.

The elephant just doesn't convey the essence of how they operate. I think a lemming would be more appropriate.

George is hanging on so he won't be the "loser" in Iraq. I really think the Republicans would welcome a Democrat in the White House. The loss in Iraq would be the GOP mantra for 2012.

The new Orwellian catchphrase to guarantee perpetual war for perpetual peace for the war criminals is "The gains are fragile and reversible".... Of course they are... and what a fine job the wordsmiths over at Minipax did to come up with this new ambiguous turn of phrase.

Why... whatever happens...if it gets worse... they can claim it was always fragile.... if things deteriorate from there, then they can claim the 'reversible' part of their claim. On the off chance that there is some sort of resolution (perish the thought!)... then they can claim that they had spoke of 'gains' all along.

All hail the Ministry of Peace!

So now Petraeus is saying we need to stop drawing down the "surge." In other words, based on the attacks of the past couple of weeks, it will take the return of every member of the U.S. armed forces we can currently supply just to keep the lid on this thing, which is all we succeeded in doing during the surge. Our troops can look forward to making military outposts in Iraq their first home with occasional vacations back in the U.S. on domestic military bases. Meanwhile, this whole game is costing us what? continuous loss of the lives of U.S. troops and about $100/month for each family in the U.S. to be paid in the future, since it's all being borrowed from the central banks of Japan and China. Is there ANYTHING that's right with this picture?

As political theatre this one looks like a trap. Already the MSM have prepared us for the grilling that Obama and Clinton are going to give the General. Will Pertreaus score a few sympathy points? Senator I'm just a country boy doing the hard job the Commander in Chief has given me. Maybe you should take it up with him (SURRENDER MONKEY!!)...

So you're absolutely right, both sides will probably call it a draw. The Presidential candidates will settle for a couple of sound bites. We shouldn't assume that just because the hearings show nothing of substance that nothing is going on behind the scenes. The hearings with the Federal Reserve board failed to produce tough questions on what the Fed was doing when it bailed out Bear Sterns, byt after the hearing Barney Frank laid the foundation for a deeper inquiry.

The real issue is whether there is a bigger trap, a premeditated attack on Iran. The rumor mills, Russian Intel, etc. are all saying so, but they have said it before. The point to be made at these hearings, is whether the General is a political lackey of the President. How many Generals have there been General? Is that normal?

I just watched a network report on the presidential opinions of the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan and it looks like the troops just might take their future into their own hands after 7+ years of getting shit on. Lots of democratic votes seem to be coming from the military in the near future.

Here's a word for Reid and Pelosi: Don't shit on the soldiers this time around if they have the balls to hand their future to you. Grow a fucking spine and do the shit you said you would over a year ago.

If you call the addition of 30,000 troops and a predictable drop in violence "progress", then you must be willing to keep those troops in Iraq indefinitely.

The "limited engagement" strategy we all heard about last year was just another Bush-Cheney smokescreen to cover up a permanent increase in our Iraq forces.

Iraq does not yet have a standing army capable of keeping the peace if we leave. That, in itself, tells the entire story. How many years does it take to pull together the necessary elements to train and equip an effective Iraqi force? Remember that Iraq had a standing army before we arrived.

Knowing the lies and deceit used by the Bush Administration to attack Iraq, I would not be surprised if our true objective is to keep a US military presence in Iraq indefinitely. A weak in ineffective Iraqi military is OK with Bush because our real reason for attacking Iraq may not have been the "threat" of WMD.

The real reason for attacking Iraq, I firmly believe, was to secure the production of oil.

It sure is nice to have a grown up back in the war room. Hope you can stick around for awhile.

Sen.Inohe's comment today about Camp Buca was an all-time classic.

He met with Iraqi detainees while in Iraq this year and received "positive" responses from them....

Here is how it may have gone down...

Sen Inohe: Mr. Aziz, how is your stay going?

Mr. Aziz: Senator, it could not be better.

Sen. Inohe: Have you been fairly treated?

Mr. Aziz: The staff here has been very considerate. Although the pool has been closed for the past few months for repairs the golf course has just been re-opened. You don't know how much stress our civil disagreements can wear on you until you take a little break.

Sen Inohe: Wow! you sound like you have only positive things to say about your stay here?

Mr. Aziz: I wish I could say more Senator, but I must take your leave as I am late for my squash tournament.