By now the whole damn world has had time to hear about all those Iraqi war documents that have been leaked to the public….the newest batch came out a week or so ago….some 400,000 pieces of information…..I purposefully waited until after the mid-term elections….why?  It would be a mention in the media because the election would be the big story….because it gives the pundits a reason to live…..

I spent a week or so checking out the conserv commentators on the tube to see where it was falling on the subject……almost to a man/woman the reporting they did was about how the leaks would destroy our national security and the one who leaked should be tried for treason or some such trumped up charge…..not one mention that these documents are full of out right LIES told to the American people….not one word about the hero of the Surge, Patreus and that his big plan was not that effective as the WH would have us believe….and I mean both Bush and Obama White Houses……

I focus on the Surge that all Repubs have thumped their chest like sex starved primates and tried to deify a general for being a genius that apparently he was NOT…..

A analysis of the newest Wikileak documents from the Consortiumnews.com:

For instance, the records suggest that the sectarian slaughter of 2006 was burning itself out largely because brutal ethnic cleansing had separated the Shiites and the Sunnis. The indiscriminate violence also had turned many Iraqis against both the excesses of al-Qaeda in Iraq and the sectarian militias.

Also, in 2006, key insurgent leaders, such as al-Qaeda’s Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, were killed and Sunni tribesmen in restive Anbar Province were signing up to accept American money in exchange for switching sides – all of these key developments preceding the “surge.”

Though the additional 30,000 U.S. troops in 2007 may have helped accelerate or consolidate these gains, the eventual drop in violence after the “surge” appears more coincidental than causal – and thus may not justify the acclaim given to President Bush and Gen. David Petraeus or the claims by neoconservative war strategists that they were vindicated.

A New York Times analysis of the WikiLeaks documents lends support to the more skeptical view of the “surge,” noting that the growing revulsion among Iraqis over the violence and a renewed hope for peace go a long way toward explaining why the killing slowed.

I do so enjoy being proved correct…..for not many in the mainstream media was critical of the Surge from the beginning….but on the other hand there were several bloggers, including myself, that saw it for what it was……a game of military chess……to take credit for a good thing even if it was not your doing……

The Surge was NOT the huge success that the politicos and the media made it out to be…..the tribes were already on the payroll of the US and the surge was more to protect Baghdad than it was to secure Anbar province….but it looks good on a general’s resume to say that he secured the province and it was handed over to the Iraqis for further protection……I said this in 2007 and again 2008……of course, then I was a doom and gloom writer with NO foot into reality….and now with the ‘official’ military documents saying basically the same thing as I……I have but one thing to say to my conserv detractors……BITE ME!