Essentially, what Obama did yesterday w/Petraeas and Crocker was to call their bluff.

[hisownpetard]

In so many words, he asked them: How perfect would the situation in Iraq have to be for you and the Administration to say, 'OK, enough. We did our job.
Now we can bring our troops home.'

Since they keep moving the goalposts, his question in effect asked them to define what they see as "winning." If things were as they are now, but without our troops
stationed there, would that be an acceptable situation? (After all, Crocker and Petraeus just spent untold hours telling us in glowing terms of the progress that's been made
in Iraq during the last 6 months).

If this war is unwinnable, might as well bring everyone home now.
If it's winnable, how will we know when we get there?

With only the few minutes available to him, I think we got an up-close glimpse of Obama's diplomatic capabilities at work. He brings no anger to the table - just
smart questions and abundant insight, which he uses to get to the bottom of the problem at hand.

The other candidates always seem to need two chairs - one for them, one for their ego.
I did not see that yesterday with Obama.

What I saw was someone who truly wants to end the war, who understands that both sides are invested in their own policies and want to find what they think is the correct path to follow,
He therefore is intent on forging a new path, somewhere between the two existing parallel ones, that everyone can walk.

Once again, I am so happy that I've decided to support Obama, a decision that seems to get reinforced with every new day.