Hey lars, how did your obssessin about Clinton "demanding" to become Vice President work out for ya?
Kinda made you look like a fool, eh bud?
And thanks for showing, yet again, that you understand Iraq at an elementary school level (like all righties), while I understand Iraq at the doctoral level, as proven the past 5 years.
As I have always stated (and intelligent people understand), Iraq was never going to be won through a strictly military action. I also correctly stated that we would eventually overcome the Sunni insurgency and then move on the the next LAYERS of problems Iraq would pose and ultimately the neo-con goals of a western, Israeli-loving democracy that allowed the U.S. to project its military might into the middle east would be proven to be the idiotic pipe dream it truly was.
The goal of the surge was to give the Iraqi government time to come together and build a governing concensus. In fact, that goal is even farther away now than it was when the surge began.
Petraeus embraced the Sunni awakening and paid them off to be an ally against AQI. Not that it was a bad move because it did result in the pretty much the elimination of AQI in Iraq (which was inevitable in any case) , but Iraq is like playing pickup sticks (maybe if I dumb down my post and compare it to a child's game, you might better understand). You move one stick and some other of the sticks may also go into movement, creating a more difficult result than the original problem you were trying to solve in the first place.
Don't expect you righties to understand. You never have and likely never will.
Iraq is simply too complex for you to be able to properly understand.