"THE IRAQ WAR, PETREAS, WHO WILL LEAD AMERICA AND......?"

General Michael Hayden, the leader of the CIA, or Michael Ware (CNN Foreign Analyst), who do you believe? Iraq has been shaky, over the last two weeks, or so, in having the Shiite Militias, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki going out on his own (in south Iraq, to battle, with little U. S. assistance and the British confined in an air base, outside Basra, like women), and now their are democrats and republicans alike coming out of the woodwork, like termites, with all kinds of rhetoric. Regardless, on CNN (in the middle of the week), Michael Ware's face is back on television. He stepped right back into his spot, preaching the doom and gloom, of Iraq's demise, after being absent for much of the last three months (due to the success and low death tolls). On "Meet the Press" Sunday, General Michael Hayden, the head of the CIA, was telling a completely different story. Saying, the Iraqi government is to be in the lead, in heading off of militia and Al-Queada, turning around his original comments in 2006 (saying the Iraqi government, would be irreversible, in the short term).

The common man and woman is not previed to classified information, bound by the press, media outlets, and listening to a variety of leaders, pundits, and sometimes complete morons, to figure out where to stand on the war. When Michael Ware, who comes out and says, "their is not any way in the world, with the United States 'bribing' the Sunni groups, not being able to get a hold on the Shiite militias, and the al-Maliki government (who is still cozy with Iran and Shiite causes) is not in control, there will be no way to win, in this civil war," people can believe him, or not. When the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, comes out and says, "We have gone to school on this (the Iraq war)," meaning the United States military and commanders have learned from our mistakes. He continued, "We have gotten much better against Al-Queada, we can see what is going on, and we should continue to keep getting better." These two men could not be any farther apart, on their comments, yet one has 100% access to all of the intelligence in the United States and the world, Ware has only what his eyes perceive and what he has been told.

Whether CNN's Ware, or General Hayden, are correct, is not going to be known, by the average American. Only a general feeling, a learning experience (by researching and studying nonstop, on Iraq and the Middle East), or a guess by Americans can tell who is correct and who is not. There are only two real questions left. One of these questions, Americans can, once again, do nothing about. The second question, may be the biggest decision for the United States citizens, since the American Civil War.

The first question is pretty obvious (it doesn't include the rhetorical and left leaning Michael Ware, at all), "What will General David Petreas say, in the next 10 days, to the White House and Congress?" If Petreas comes home, saying that we will need an extended stay, of the surge battalions, then the democratic side of the government (or the left) will come unglued. However, if he comes back from Iraq and says, "We are not going to gain any 'political' and/or other kind of gains, by keeping the military surge numbers up. Therefore, we will pull back and start to reduce forces, from Iraq. However, they will go straight into Afghanistan, to help on the Pakistan border, to battle the remaining and incoming Taliban forces and Al-Queada." The conservatives, republicans, and right will begin to howl, judging we are leaving prematurely and are caving to political polls and other "nonmilitary" roles. Either way, General Petreas is the only cog that matters in the machine, coming up, in the Iraq war. In a Presidential year, the democrats are to gutless to cut off funding, use any kind of a vote to bring troops home, or use the power of the people to reverse anything, he may say, or do. However, the American people must have faith, in the General in charge of the Iraq War, because the "common American" does not have any idea about national security secrets and intelligence, period.

The main question, all Americans have a say in, "What direction does the American voter, want the country to go in? Therefore, who should be voted the Vice President and President of America?" If John McCain is voted into the White House, then he will follow the Petreas strategy, do what the military leaders wish, and will be a complete hawk on all "National Security" issues. There is no secret, McCain's intimate knowledge of geopolitical and national security issues, due to his massive record, in these departments. However, on the other side of the coin, there is Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. They are basically the exact same on the Iraq war issue, as of now. Sure, Obama spoke out against the war, from the beginning. However, today is not the beginning and we are there, so what will he do, once elected? In the "Annis Bizarre" (complete facade and circus behind the scenes), Samantha Powers, Obama's foreign policy advisor, quit. Powers stated, "Behind the scenes, Obama does not have a plan to get the troops out of Iraq, in the nine months, he has promised. In fact, he is not sure how he will get troops out, or if he will get them out at all, due to the facts of how things change on the ground." Obama is going on shows and doing interviews with "The View," "Hardball with Chris Mathews" and other democratic (softball) venues, knowing he will not get the hard "policy issue" questions, at these interviews. Hillary Clinton, is basically in the same boat. She has played the "dove" and the "hawk," when need be. Sometimes, she is pulling troops out of Iraq, "because she is ready to lead on day one," but the next day (in front of veterans and blue collar workers) she either does not comment at all, or else she states, "It is insincere, to call out plans, this far out."

Where does the American people go, to figure out who is telling the truth? Who is going to lead? Why is Michael Ware only on CNN, when he is spewing filth on American troops and the war? Finally, when will the American people stand up, pay attention, demand the tough questions going to the candidates character and judgment (over the years, and not what they feel on a given day), and finally who will be the best candidate(s) to lead this country from the front, rather than from the politically correct position? Only one can hope, the American people can see, research, and learn to the best of their ability, who is a "real candidate" and who is going to take America in a wrong direction, in the next four to eight years.