you know what?

i've never watched the view. when i HAVE seen the pea-brained (and really, her brain CANNOT be bigger than that of a weasel - NO offense to weasels) thaing, it's been on a clip which features one of the 'brilliant' things she's infamous for uttering. the piece o' steamin' shite is a spewing puppet for neo-nazi right wing bigoted racist homophobic clan gang. why the f**k anyone would have her on a "news" show is beyond me. i'd rather see carrot top on faux news

Hasselbeck on Obama: "[H]e seemed for a while more willing to give the fist bump to Ahmadinejad than our own General Petraeus"

On the June 18 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, co-host of ABC's The View, asserted of Sen. Barack Obama: "[I]t bothered me that he seemed for a while more willing to give the fist bump to [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad than our own General [David] Petraeus." Hasselbeck continued: "It bothers me. It bothers me as a mom. It bothers me as a working woman. It bothers me as a citizen of this country."

Hasselbeck's reference to Petraeus is not the first time that someone on Fox News has echoed attacks by conservatives for what they suggest falsely is Obama's refusal to discuss the situation in Iraq with Petraeus. Vets For Freedom chairman Pete Hegseth, on the May 29 edition of Fox News' Your World, falsely claimed that Obama has "never met with General Petraeus," which host Neil Cavuto did not challenge. In fact, Obama has, as recently as April 8, questioned Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker at a Senate Committee on Foreign Relations hearing on Iraq......

ahhhhhhhhhhhh

they just make this shite up as they go along. if it's going 'good' they have one story. if it gets a little bad, they have another. if it worsens, yet another. then if it's over the edge, they start pointing fingers at phantoms. he did it. no, she did it. no, he. no, that one. no him. no her. and on and on. when i say going good, i only mean no us troop deaths. i do NOT in any circumstance mean going good for the iraqi people. we've disrupted their lives and their country for generations to come.
if it's al-qaeda or iran or whomever, WE DID IT. we are 100% responsible.

Iran Top Threat To Iraq, U.S. Says
Focus on Al-Qaeda Now Diminishing

By Karen DeYoung Washington Post Staff Writer
Last week's violence in Basra and Baghdad has convinced the Bush administration that actions by Iran, and not al-Qaeda, are the primary threat inside Iraq, and has sparked a broad reassessment of policy in the region, according to senior U.S. officials.
Evidence of an increase in Iranian weapons, training and direction for the Shiite militias that battled U.S. and Iraqi security forces in those two cities has fixed new U.S. attention on what Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates yesterday called Tehran's "malign" influence, the officials said.
The intensified focus on Iran coincides with diminished emphasis on al-Qaeda in Iraq as the leading justification for an ongoing U.S. military presence in Iraq.
In congressional hearings this week, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus said the U.S. military has driven al-Qaeda from Baghdad, Anbar province and central Iraq, and he depicted the group as now largely concentrated in a reduced territory around the northern city of Mosul.
During their Washington visit, Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker barely mentioned al-Qaeda in Iraq but spoke extensively of Iran. .....

did the crockmesiter and the petty tray us mention

the curfew in their 'testimony'? why waste our time? iraq is a f**king mess. WE did it. we KNOW we f**ked up. now what do we do? it appears, 'stay the course'. why? to save face? we need the money we're spending there, HERE. our economy is FAILING. our OWN people are hurting. we've killed their country, now we're aiming to kill our own (and we're WELL on our way)

Five years after fall of Baghdad, all-day curfew is imposed
By Kim Sengupta
The fifth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad and the toppling of the statute of Saddam Hussein – a symbol of US victory and might – was marked yesterday by death and destruction across the country and an admission from the White House that projected troop withdrawals would have to be delayed.
The Iraqi capital remains under curfew after another round of bloodshed in which mortar rounds landed in Sadr City, killing seven people, including two children, and injuring 24 others. Further gunfights in the sprawling Shia slum led to six more dying and 15 others being wounded.
The area is a centre of support for the radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, and came after days of clashes between his militia, the Mehdi Army, and Iraqi government forces in which 55 people have been killed and more than 200 injured. The Shia fighters vowed last nightthat retribution would be taken for the "unprovoked attack" in Sadr City which they claimed was the responsibility of the US forces.
Meanwhile in Washington, President George Bush was set to accept the plea of General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, for a "pause" in pulling out some of the thousands of troops sent in for the "surge". At the same time the operation is being portrayed as a vindication of American policy and a tacit admission of the fragility of the so-called stabilisation which is supposed to be taking place now............

say WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT????????

f**k the troops and their families. let's make sure the big oil companies are well taken care of! damn straight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

just when you thought you heard and knew it all, something else jumps up and bitch-slapps ya

Outside View: Petraeus' promise to Big Oil
By NICK MOTTERNUPI Outside View CommentatorHASTINGS-ON-HUDSON, N.Y., April 8 (UPI) -- Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of Multi-National Force-Iraq, needs to answer some oil questions as he testifies before Congress this week, coinciding with Wednesday's fifth anniversary of the U.S. occupation of Iraq's Oil Ministry.Speaking at a news conference in Iraq with Vice President Dick Cheney on March 17, Petraeus said Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had asked him to call "large Western corporations" to get them to invest in Iraq's oil, according to United Press International. Since the world knows how eager the likes of ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Total and others are to get into Iraq, Petraeus' calls were apparently necessary to give them some strong military assurances that their investments and people will be safe there."We have made a few initial inquiries on (Iraq's) behalf," Petraeus' military spokesman said in a coyly disingenuous statement, refusing to tell UPI the companies the general had contacted. "Rest assured," he said, "it would be companies that have the capability and reach to take on projects of the size and scope that Iraq needs to continue to progress forward."The general needs to be asked which companies he talked to and what military information he may have imparted when he made these extraordinary calls, which may well violate military regulations, trying to clinch the deal that U.S. troops staked out when they chased looters out of the Oil Ministry five years ago and surrounded it with barbed wire. ..........

it's one thing for you and i to read and understand

this. it's a totally different thing for king george and his court to read AND UNDERSTAND THIS. our congress and our senate have been sitting on their effing fat asses for more than five years. this war is wrong and it has been from day one. yet the shite keeps going on and on and on. more reports, more testimony more of this and that. while the people of iraq are killing themselves (and us). they don't have water and electricity and education. their country is in ruins and our troops are in ruins (as well as their families). when is someone going to say ENOUGH?
Exhausted, Overextended Troops Ready to 'Unravel'
By Bobby Muller, AlterNet.
A central theme of General David Petraeus' tour of Capitol Hill are his pleas for patience with the U.S. war in Iraq. He called for a "pause" against the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, citing the need to consolidate the gains that have been achieved over the past few months.
The crushing burden our military already endures ought to give serious pause to Members of Congress. The health of our military must be a top priority because current deployment rates are grinding up our military men and women, tearing at the bonds of families, eroding military readiness -- and leaving us less secure at home.
It is commonly known that a very small percentage of the American population has borne a disproportionate burden of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. What is less commonly understood is that our Army's Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) -- a subset of this already small population -- have been repeatedly sent to the frontlines, enduring high-intensity combat for extended periods with inadequate time at home between tours. This has always been a problem during America's wars, but at least in previous conflicts the draft provided a pool of manpower resources that could be dipped into to provide rest for those who bore the greatest burden. That is no longer true.
Some Army BCTs have deployed four times since Sept. 11, 2001. Members of the 10th Mountain Division, one of the most heavily used in Iraq and Afghanistan, had a mere six months of dwell time between their second and third deployments since Sept. 11. Dozens of soldiers based at Fort Carson, Colorado, were recently sent back to Iraq despite having medical conditions that should have made them ineligible for continued deployments.........

a damn fine analysis

of what went down and what's going down in iraq
Spin One for the Gipper
by Jeff Huber
I have to say it again: If the Bush administration put a fraction of the effort it spends on spinning its wars into winning them, it wouldn’t need to spin them.
The current clash between Iraqi Shiite Cleric Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s security forces took root last year when Sadr told his forces to take an operational pause for resupply and recuperation. That reduced violence levels enough to allow U.S. commander David Petraeus to claim his surge strategy was working even though it didn’t accomplish its intended political objectives. One might have expected a supposedly smart guy like Petraeus to leave well enough alone, but no. George Bush’s “main man” had to poke his pistol into the hornet’s nest, raiding selected elements of the Mahdi Army in Baghdad’s Sadr City and Shiite population centers in southern Iraq.
The Sadrists warned for months that they would retaliate if the harassment didn’t stop. Petraeus must have been too busy escorting John McCain and Lindsey Graham on shopping sprees in Baghdad to listen, because he kept at it, using both U.S. forces and elements of the Badr organization, one of Sadr’s rival Shiite political groups whose members dominate Iraq’s security forces.
It was not too long after Dick Cheney’s surprise visit to Baghdad on March 17 that Maliki launched his offensive against the Mahdi Army in Baghdad and in the southern city of Basra. The big media were strangely silent about the implications of the timing of the two events. Sadr’s people responded to Maliki’s push with a rocket and mortar attack on the Green Zone in Baghdad. ..........

stories like these aren't headlines any more

just yesterday there was another one and the day before as well (where i believe at least 7 died in a bombing AT A FUNERAL). i'm not going to let it go and i don't think this country should let it go either. we're DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE

At Least 15 Iraqis Die As Building Explodes
Attack Highlights Problems in North

By Joshua Partlow Washington Post Foreign Service
BAGHDAD, Jan. 23 -- A building rigged with explosives detonated Wednesday in Mosul, creating a thunderous blast that killed at least 15 people in the northern Iraqi city, which has become a gathering point and growing target for Sunni insurgents.
The late-afternoon explosion, which also wounded at least 132 people, took place as Iraqi soldiers were investigating reports that weapons had been stockpiled in the three-story building, located in a densely populated area of western Mosul near a soft-drink factory, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials.
The dead consisted of 12 Iraqi citizens and three Iraqi soldiers, the U.S. military reported. Emergency services worked into the evening to take the injured to the hospital...........

'VICTORY LAP'?

i'm not sure that is what king george thought he was doing OR that is the thought of the author of this article. if it IS king george's thought he is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more naked than we all thought

Bush Meets With Petraeus
In Kuwait, President Seems to Claim Vindication for 'Surge'

By Michael Abramowitz Washington Post Staff Writer
CAMP ARIFJAN, Kuwait, Jan. 12 -- President Bush ventured to this sprawling U.S. base near Iraq on Saturday to begin exploring further troop reductions with his top commander and take something of a victory lap over the country's improved security conditions a year after announcing "the surge."
Bush seemed anxious to avoid another moment similar to one in 2003 soon after the fall of Saddam Hussein, when he appeared on the USS Abraham Lincoln below a giant sign reading "Mission Accomplished." In a statement to reporters here, Bush spoke of the difficult challenges ahead, such as defeating the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq and reaching political reconciliation among Iraq's feuding sects. ........

the possible collapse of a damn in iraq

has 'ALARMED' american officials. i in NO WAY want to trivialize that. nor do i want ONE MORE PERSON in iraq to be hurt or displaced by either human hand or act of nature hand. want i DO WANT is for american officials to be ALARMED at what's going on in america. too bad they weren't 'ALARMED' during the time of katrina, huh?

Iraqi Dam Seen In Danger of Deadly Collapse

By Amit R. Paley Washington Post Foreign Service
AT THE MOSUL DAM, Iraq -- The largest dam in Iraq is in serious danger of an imminent collapse that could unleash a trillion-gallon wave of water, possibly killing thousands of people and flooding two of the largest cities in the country, according to new assessments by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other U.S. officials.
Even in a country gripped by daily bloodshed, the possibility of a catastrophic failure of the Mosul Dam has alarmed American officials, who have concluded that it could lead to as many as 500,000 civilian deaths by drowning Mosul under 65 feet of water and parts of Baghdad under 15 feet, said Abdulkhalik Thanoon Ayoub, the dam manager. "The Mosul dam is judged to have an unacceptable annual failure probability," in the dry wording of an Army Corps of Engineers draft report. ............

didn't they just say

they defeated al qaeda in iraq? they JUST said it last week. yet here is general petraeus saying al qaeda is driving around iraq in government ambulances....HMMMMMMMM what up with dat?
one day one story. another day another story. now give 'em billions MORE for their folly

U.S.: Al Qaeda Using Iraqi Government Vehicles, Ambulances
Brian Ross and Luis Martinez Report:
Citing evidence that insurgents and al Qaeda terrorists are using Iraqi government vehicles and ambulances to carry out missions, Gen. David Petraeus has ordered a new system of checkpoints for almost all Iraqi official convoys and motorcades.
The only exceptions, according to an unclassified version of Gen. Petraeus' order, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, are "Tier 1" motorcades, such as that of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
U.S. officials in Washington confirmed the order and say it has been in effect since early October...........

you claim al qaeda in iraq

is GONE. now you claim shiite militias have taken their place. when you claim you have defeated the shiia militias who then will you claim is 'bothering' you? the civilians? the iraqi government? who who who?

U.S. Planners See Shiite Militias as Rising Threat

By Ann Scott Tyson Washington Post Staff Writer
Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker have concluded that Shiite extremists pose a rising threat to the U.S. effort in Iraq, as the relative influence of Sunni insurgent groups such as al-Qaeda in Iraq has diminished drastically because of ongoing U.S. operations.
This judgment forms part of the changes that Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, approved last week to their classified campaign strategy for the country, which covers the period through summer 2009. The updated plan anticipates shifting the U.S. military effort to focus more on countering Shiite militias -- some backed by Iran -- that have generated new violence as they battle for power in the south and elsewhere in Iraq, said senior military and diplomatic officials familiar with the plan. ...........

the question

BEGS asking American Conservative Mag Mocks Petraeus As 'Sycophant Savoir' - Will Congress Condemn It Life They Did the Moveon.org Ad?

Posted by Jon Ponder

The cover of the October 8, 2007, issue of Pat Buchanan’s magazine, American Conservative, shows a photo of Gen. David Petraeus under the headline, “Sycophant Savior.” The cover story is subheaded, “General Petraeus wins a battle in Washington — if not in Baghdad.”
Compare the criticism implied in that headline with the much vilified headline of the ad from Moveon.org: “General Petraeus or General Betray Us? Cooking the books for the White House.”
Beyond the headline, the American Conservative article is harshly critical of the general and the partisan political role he has chosen to play. The writer, Andrew J. Bacevich, describes Petraeus as a “politcal general of the worst kind — one who indulges in the politics of accommodation that is Washington’s bread and butter but has thereby deferred a far more urgent political imperative, namely, bringing our military policies into harmony with our political purposes.”..........

we hear what we want to hear

we listen with one ear closed. we are afraid to say the emperor has no clothes.

and i don't undestand why

Wash. Post's Murray cited flawed poll, repeated GOP claim that "the public has grown more patient on Iraq"

Summary: In a Washington Post article, Shailagh Murray wrote: "GOP Senate offices circulated the results of a Gallup poll released this week that showed 54 percent of those surveyed think [Gen. David] Petraeus's plan for removing troops is the right pace, or even too quick." However, this poll question did not explain to respondents how many troops Petraeus' plan called for removing or over what period of time this withdrawal would take place. Other polling shows that when respondents are told specifically what Petraeus recommended, the results are dramatically different.
In a September 22 Washington Post article, staff writer Shailagh Murray asserted that "Republicans sounded emboldened" during the September 21 Senate debate on the Iraq war and that they argued "[t]he public has grown more patient on Iraq ... after a report last week from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus."...........

the truth about the numbers

did the msm pick this up? NOT that i saw

Exclusive: Petraeus' Sectarian Death Count Methodology
By Spencer Ackerman
In the debate over the surge, there have been a number of questions raised within the government about an important metric for understanding whether the U.S. military's strategy is succeeding -- how Multinational Force-Iraq calculates sectarian violence.
Earlier this month, David Walker of the Government Accountability Office testified that he could not "get comfortable" with General David Petraeus' methodology for determining sectarianism, considering it too inferential to be reliable. His report, echoing objections from senior intelligence officials, instead tabulated the pace of attacks on civilians and found the surge didn't appear to have a significant effect on civilian-targeted violence. However, relying on data interpreted through the MNF-I methodology, Petraeus testified that sectarian violence had fallen in Iraq to mid-2006 levels.
The actual methodology MNF-I employs has remained unknown. Until now.
In response to a Freedom of Information Act request I filed two weeks ago, MNF-I has provided TPMmuckraker with its criteria for identifying ethnic and sectarian violence. We've added the methodology to our Document Collection, and you can read it here. ........

you know what?

i didn't see the ad. it wouldn't have bothered me either way though. am i the ONLY one here who is seeing this irony? two words for y'all

SWIFT BOAT

perhaps i would have taken a different tactic than move on. perhaps not. i know that it's NOT petraeus i'm angry at (first and foremost). i know it's NOT HIS fault we're in iraq (and katrina victims are still suffering and our children are uninsured and our rights are being fritted away)..........
why such a furor now? why not then? why isn't there a furor for us BEING in iraq period? why are we still there?

MoveOn Unmoved By Furor Over Ad Targeting Petraeus

By Perry Bacon Jr.Washington Post Staff Writer
A few weeks before Army Gen. David H. Petraeus's much-anticipated testimony on Iraq, the leadership of MoveOn.org, the Internet-based liberal group that has rallied its 3 million members around the country to oppose the war, decided on a change in strategy.
Rather than making another appeal to moderate Republicans to join Senate Democrats in passing an antiwar resolution, they would take on the credibility of Petraeus himself. Their weapon, they decided in conjunction with Fenton Communications, its Washington-based public relations firm, would be an ad in the New York Times that provocatively played off his name with this question in large letters: "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" ........

and i just came across this from echidne of the snakes

Correct me if I'm wrong here. But by my calculation, more U.S. senators (72) voted today to condemn a newspaper ad attacking Gen. Petraeus than voted yesterday (56) to lengthen the time off troops get from the frontlines in Iraq, thereby reducing individual soldiers exposure to actual attacks. Am I missing something, or is that about right?

how much more right could THAT be?

more truth

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH

yes i can

NO YOU CAN'T

yes i can

NO YOU CAN'T

yes i can - so let me hear it
(video at the link below)

U.S. Is Paying Off Iraq's Worst War Criminals in Attempt to Ward Off Attacks

By Katie Halper, AlterNet
Title: Director's Cut: New Video shows the truth in Anbar that Petraeus does not want us to see.
When Bush was in Iraq two weeks ago he posed for photographs with Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, the leader of the Anbar Awakening, an alliance of Sunni tribes who vow to back the United States and fight against al Qaeda.
Last Monday, General Petraeus testified to Congress that "a year ago" Anbar province "was assessed 'lost' politically ... Today, it is a model of what happens when local leaders and citizens decide to oppose al Qaeda and reject its Taliban-like ideology."
Three days later, the assassination of Abu Risha in Ramadi dramatically undercut Bush and Petraeus' claims of Anbar victory and peacekeeping. But what else is the administration keeping from us about Anbar?
Rick Rowley, a journalist and independent filmmaker of Big Noise Films, was one of the last people to videotape and interview the Sunni sheikh, and his video report Uncovering the Truth Behind the Anbar Success Story, presents a very different picture of the Anbar Awakening.
Embedded with the U.S. Army and Iraqi militias, Rowley shows us that the Sunni "freedom fighters" with whom the United States is now allied are not just insurgents who had been killing Americans but war criminals responsible for sectarian cleansing........

and now for some

REAL facts and figures.....

What They’re Saying in Anbar Province

by Gary Langer
IN his address to the nation on Thursday, President Bush singled out progress in Anbar Province as the model for United States success in Iraq. The president’s claims echoed those made earlier in the week by Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, in his Congressional testimony. And they raised a question worth examining: Do United States military alliances with Sunni tribal leaders truly reflect a turning of hearts and minds away from Anbar’s bitter anti-Americanism?
The data from our latest Iraq poll suggest not.

Withdrawal timetable aside, every Anbar respondent in our survey opposed the presence of American forces in Iraq - 69 percent “strongly” so. Every Anbar respondent called attacks on coalition forces “acceptable,” far more than anywhere else in the country. All called the United States-led invasion wrong, including 68 percent who called it “absolutely wrong.” No wonder: Anbar, in western Iraq, is almost entirely populated by Sunni Arabs, long protected by Saddam Hussein and dispossessed by his overthrow. There are critical improvements in Anbar. Most important have been remarkable advances in confidence in the Iraqi Army and police. In ABC’s survey in March, not a single respondent rated local security positively - now 38 percent do. Nonetheless, nobody surveyed in Anbar last month gave the United States any credit. Ratings of living conditions remain dismal: respondents were deeply dissatisfied with the availability of electricity and fuel, jobs, medical care and a host of other elements of daily life. And the violence, while sharply down, has hardly ended: One in four reported that car bombs or suicide attacks had occurred near them in the last six months. Last week’s murder of Abdul Sattar Buzaigh al-Rishawi, an Anbar sheik who had allied himself with the United States, only underscored this grim reality.

some reacations

to the liar in chief's, king george's speech

Yes, Surge, That's My Baby: Press Responds to Bush Speech
By E&P Staff
NEW YORK By the time President Bush addressed the nation tonight, little suspense about his remarks remained. What Gen. Petraeus was going to recommend -- continue to "surge" -- was clear weeks ago, and excerpts from the president's remarks were released by the White House this afternoon. So the media had plenty of time to figure out how to respond.Below we will carry some of the reactions, with new material added at the top.*Nancy Youssef, McClatchy NewspapersThursday night, Bush declared success and painted a rosy picture.There was no mention of a range of government reports, from a National Security Estimate to a Government Accountability Office report and even the testimony this week of U.S. Iraq commander Army Gen. David Petraeus, that has said Iraqi civilian casualties remain high and that it will be years before Iraqi security forces can take control.Other reports have stressed that Iraqis continue to flee their homes looking for safety at unprecedented rates and that Shiite militias continue to force Sunni Muslims from their homes. Baghdad residents complain that their city has become even more segregated than before the surge, divided now by hastily erected concrete walls to keep rival sects separate.*David S. Cloud, The New York Times:It is the second time in 10 months that Mr. Bush has opted for higher troop levels in Iraq than are favored by some of his senior military advisers. Among those who supported a smaller troop increase than the one Mr. Bush ordered last January were members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.....................

hmmmmmmmm a little somethin' something'

i find VERY interesting. where IS petraeus' bossman?
(now remember, those ain't my woids, theys the woids o' his bossman)
U.S.-IRAQ: Fallon Derided Petraeus, Opposed the Surge

By Gareth Porter *WASHINGTON, Sep 12 (IPS) - In sharp contrast to the lionisation of Gen. David Petraeus by members of the U.S. Congress during his testimony this week, Petraeus's superior, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM), derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad last March, according to Pentagon sources familiar with reports of the meeting.Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ass-kissing little chickenshit" and added, "I hate people like that", the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior. That extraordinarily contentious start of Fallon's mission to Baghdad led to more meetings marked by acute tension between the two commanders. Fallon went on develop his own alternative to Petraeus's recommendation for continued high levels of U.S. troops in Iraq during the summer. The enmity between the two commanders became public knowledge when the Washington Post reported Sep. 9 on intense conflict within the administration over Iraq. The story quoted a senior official as saying that referring to "bad relations" between them is "the understatement of the century". .....

CentCom Chief Fallon: Petraeus Is ‘An Ass-Kissing, Little Chickensh*t,’ ‘I Hate People Like That’

During the Iraq war, the Central Command (CENTCOM) head — who leads U.S. operations in the entire Middle East region — and the Multinational Force Commander (MNF) have regularly testified together about the course of the war in Iraq.
Former-MNF Commander Gen. George Casey and his CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid constantly briefed Congress about the situation in Iraq and its regional effects. In at least four public hearings after Casey took office in 2004, the pair testified together:
Senate Armed Services [6/23/05]
House Armed Services [6/23/05]
House Armed Services [9/29/05]
Senate Armed Services [9/29/05]
In January, President Bush replaced Abizaid and Casey, who were “surge” skeptics, with Adm. William Fallon and Gen. David Petraeus. This week, Petraeus — in the first public hearings since taking on his new role — delivered his Iraq assessment to great media fanfare. But where was his boss, Admiral Fallon? Inter-Press Service suggests animosity between the two might be one reason for Fallon’s absence:
Fallon told Petraeus [in March] that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickensh*t” and added, “I hate people like that”, the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.
The Washington Post reported this weekend that there is an internal military debate, described as “Armageddon,” brewing between Petraeus and Fallon because the two men have “profoundly different views of the U.S. role in Iraq.”............

we are or we aren't

which?
you know, i'm not even accusing anyone of lying here. i just don't think anyone knows what anyone else is doing or NOT doing. it's so convoluted and ugly and EVIL

Petraeus' Subordinate: Yes, We Are Arming Sunnis
By Spencer Ackerman - September
On at least three occasions that I counted during the Petraeus/Crocker hearings, Gen. Petraeus flatly stated that the U.S. is not providing weapons to the Sunni tribal fighters who, over the past year, have turned against al-Qaeda in Iraq. On Monday I noted how the U.S. was giving the tribes money that they used to buy weapons, making Petraeus' assurance precious and legalistic.....

...........Here's Major General Benjamin Mixon, commander of U.S. troops in northern Iraq, on those terms in June:
[Question] (on camera): Will the assistance or the coordination with these former insurgent groups extend to arming [them] or helping them out in logistics in any sense?
GEN. BENJAMIN MIXON, U.S. REGIONAL COMMANDER IN IRAQ: It certainly will. We have seen this in counterinsurgency operations before, using local nationals, if you will, arming them, forming them into scouts, if you will. And that's the primary role that we want to use them in. They know the territory, they know the enemy............