It never ceases to amaze me, how the headlines and lede paragraphs are never the REAL story.  That is always buried on page 2.  For example, an AP story by Lolita C. Baldor just out--the headline reads:  "U.S. Looking for Cease-Fires in Iraq.".

At least, that's what it read in the Baldor story released at 4:06 p.m.  Five minutes before that, Pauline Jelinek had one called, "U.S. Eyes Cease-Fires End Violence in Iraq."

WOW!  Cease-fires!  Ending violence in Iraq!  We can all come home yippee!

But keep reading, because both stories contain a quote from Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the Army's second in command in Iraq: 

"Right now, if you asked me, I would tell you I'll probably need a little bit more time to do a true assessment.  If I think I might need a little more time, (when making the September assessment to Congress) I will give an assessment saying, 'But I'd like to have a little more time."

Ah.  Buried on page 2, of course.

That's all the man needs.  A little more time.

If you read carefully, you realize that this was a Pentagon-called press conference, with Odierno speaking by video to reporters.

Consequently, there was heavy emphasis on good news, with a dire warning:

Complicating matters, he said, is that the enemy knows about the September deadline and is likely to increase the violence during the next few months in an effort to push the U.S. out. 

"They understand that if things aren't going well, a recommendation might be made to reduce our force presence here in Iraq," said Odierno.  "So in my mind, of course they are going to do that."

Of course.

So, basically, what that means is that, once they were actually GIVEN a deadline to show progress, and they realized that the useless Iraqi government was NEVER going to show progress and was content to wallow in Green Zone splendor while our men and women fought and died to prop them up--

They then frantically began wheeling and dealing with any sheik or imam or tribal leader of any stripe who would be willing to deal with them for cooperation and some measure of peace.

In other words, there is no central government, to speak of.  Just an illusion of one--like everything else in Iraq. 

Which is, of course, old news on this page.

But when they started gaining some ground this way, tribe by tribe, they thought, Holy sh**!  THIS is what we should have been doing all along.  NOW we have to start fighting the war all over again only in this NEW WAY.  And it's going to take waaay more time to pull things off than one measley summer!  We've gotta start making noises about how this is a long war and how we're making progress and how all we need is A LITTLE MORE TIME! 

Their fearless leader stepped up right away to do his part, like, talking about how he'd like to have our army in Iraq "like the Korea model," where troops have been "providing support" for 50 years.

50 years.  That IS a little more time. 

Korea, of course, WANTED us there, for one thing.  They haven't spent that 50 years trying to KILL US.  But why quibble over details?  I mean, why start now?

(Not that I wish to get into a whole sidebar about Korea.  My brother-in-law, when he was a Brig. Gen. in the Special Forces, was in charge of Korea operations for four years just recently, before he retired.  His wife told me that the older generations were grateful for the American presence, but the young people want us out.  There were riots, while they were there.  But again, whole other country, whole other culture, whole other race, whole other religion, whole other part of the world, whole other war, whole other peace--not to be confused with the Middle East, though our commander-in-chief seems to think they are interchangeable.)

Anyway, my POINT is that, just as we've been discussing, Bush is in this for, well, EVER, in order to secure those oil fields and have a home base in the Middle East closer to the action than Saudi Arabia where, I might add, almost all of the 9-11 hijackers came from, but I digress.

Petraeus and others are sending out signals that we really are making progress.

Really.

It just takes TIME, and hell, we are soooo close now!  We just need a little bit more time!

During my son's first combat deployment with the Marines, from Sept. '04 through April '05, where his unit took part in the Battle of Fallujah, (they actually recaptured the bridge from where the four Blackwater contractors had been hanged)--the first elections were held and we were told that the next six months would be crucial to restoring order in the country.

During his second deployment, from January '06 through August '06, they were writing up a constitution and getting the government set up, and we were told the next six months would be crucial to restoring order in the country.

Now, his unit which has already done three combat deployments to Iraq and were promised they wouldn't have to go back any time soon, have been ordered back for a FOURTH deployment, thanks to Bush's troop escalation help-the-Republicans-in-08 scheme, and guess what?

You'll never guess.

Well, it seems that THE NEXT SIX MONTHS ARE CRUCIAL.

Wait, no--that's not quite it.

See, it TAKES about six months to get all the troops IN PLACE.   And THAT won't happen until mid-summer.

Hell, that's not enough time!  You can't see if an escalation is working until you get ALL the troops in-country and then you need...hmmm...something along the lines of...SIX MONTHS to make your first assessment.

Then, of course, if you are showing PROGRESS, then it would be foolish to pull out, right?  I mean, that would be your assessment.

You would probably need at least another six months. 

At least.