Of course Bush should override the Pentagon. Why in God's name would you want officers with experience, leadership, pragmatism, education, combat expertise, and sound judgement giving you advice when you've got a guy you can A) kick around to make him do what you want and B) who'll sit and be good when you blame him when things go wrong.

I'd lay dollars to donuts that there's a nice, big, fat private contractor job for Gen. Petraeus when he decides to "resign" his commission.

Fallon was one of the few who stood up to Bush on his imperialistic agenda.

I heard former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter on the Stephanie Miller radio show this week. It was a scary interview. The stomach-churning part starts a little more than halfway through:

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/files/mp3/2008_0422_ritter.mp3

But Bush IS relying on the advice of his military commanders...and if he doesn't like the advise of the current ones, he just fires them and promotes some new ones whose advice is what he wants to hear.

He did say HIS military advisors. You just didn't realize that his advisors are the ones that agree with him.

"Assymetric"! Ha! What's that, the system of measuring how big an ass they've made our country out to be? I must have missed the class on assy-metrics while taking statistics.

Replace everyone who dares to disagree with him.

No wonder we've been in Iraq for five years and there's still no end in sight: Everyone who dares suggest that we should try something different gets fired.

Hmm, did McCain already know about this change when he said he'd let Petraeus dictate troop deployments to Afghanistan?

I wonder how this will all play out. Petraeus is clearly a skilled military man when it comes to tactics and counter-insurgency. He's been doing everything asked of the military in Iraq and changing existing tactics to actually achieve results.

But with CENTCOM, he's overseeing what are, in part, two conflicting wars--there are only so many troops to go around. After all of his work on Iraq, will he continue to focus his attention there to the neglect of Afghanistan?

What our media continues to fail to report is that president Bush will "follow the advice of his military commanders in the field, AS LONG AS THEY AGREE WITH HIM".

Those last few words are what really matters.

Who better than Betrayus to follow Bushit's orders to run us right into hell. I nominate Kristol to replace Petraeus as the point man in Iraq. I know of a very,very safe cafe' just outside the very, very safe Green Zone where he can has his coffee each morning until he's "obliterated" by the happy-go-lucky Iraqi population...

The best generals who have the best interests of the U.S. at heart have been run out of the military over the last seven years.

What you have left are gutless losers who keep their mouths shut and go along with whatever crazy bull%^$# the Bushies puke out.

We need the best and the brightest military minds, not more yes men.

Petraeus will be flipping hamburgers six months after the new administration takes office.

It is a good thing we have a lot of Admirals and Generals to choose from.....we can always find one that will travel lockstep with the neo-con agenda.

What did Admiral Moorer say about the U.S. military and foreign influence all those many years ago?

"Sir, the American people think this might be an obvious bit of quid-pro-quo for Gen. Petraeus' testimony to congress."

"So?"

But the "decent interval" would not have been with a few weeks of his gracious, supportive testimony to congress. I reckon the decider is trying to make as many mischief decisions as possible in his blessedly short time.

I reckon the decider is trying to make as many mischief decisions as possible in his blessedly short time.

Making him the Commander-in-Mischief?

...Is a clear indication that it will disastrously expensive (except to Kristol), kill an incalculable number of people (not named Kristol), and be totally counterproductive to whatever is claimed to be the desired result (because stating the actual purpose would be a deal killer).

"Past behavior is a reliable predictor of future conduct." Indeed...

I honestly had the same immediate reaction to the first news reports about Petraeus being elevated to head Central Command -- McCain already KNEW this was going to happen, and that's why he let that comment slip about relying on Petraeus' advice on balancing forces between Iraq and Afghanistan.

Just one more bit of evidence, if we needed any, that McCain is running for the third George W. Bush term as president. He's already part of the "inner circle" of the White House gang, ready and willing to continue the sorry policies of this administration.

Fallon rubbed the Admin the wrong way too many ways. He was against military action in Iran, he was against the "surge," and if that wasn't enough, he called the golden boy, Petraeus, "an ass-kissing little chicken-shit" to his face.

Oh I guess some will express shock, but get real. The general is getting rewarded and the neocons are being reassured. Can anyone say Iran?

The people most likely to be thrilled about this are the officers in Iraq who've gotten an up-close-and-personal look at Petraeus's ambitions and have been eager to see him sent to Centcom and out of the country.

Watch out Iran, here we come, the Bushit still has a few more month to mess up.

It's bad enough to see his name in the NYT, bad enough his opinion is still sought after outside of FOX, but please, stop quoting him in Salon. It's not worth the key strokes.

The guy is a predictable, smirking idiot.

Considering the very likely fate of the Republican Party's collusion with the Pentagon and the US

military in promoting the invasion and occupation of Iraq, come the election results in November - - this "promotion" reminds me of the comment made by an NFL player's spelling out of the meaning of the acronym "NFL" after he retired from football, after only five years:

NFL = Not For Long.