So…Why are we waiting for Petraeus?

You know how the Resident keeps saying that we should sit back on our heels and wait for what Petraeus and Crocker have to say come September?

Yeah…about that…Petraeus and Crocker aren’t even writing the report that will bear their names.

Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.

And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report's data.

So someone tell me again why we are waiting for Petraeus and Crocker to deliver Georgies foredrawn conclusions?

One “senior administration official” – speaking on condition of anonymity, of course – said that the process had put the administration in “uncomfortable positions” because they can’t decide what constitutes “satisfactory progress.”

In July, when the interim report was being written, some officials were encouraging the telling of blatant lies, by claiming progress where none existed. They urged the administration to claim success on the Exxon-Mobile Enrichment Act er, Oil Sharing Law, in spite of the fact there had been no agreement reached.

At least some insiders argued against telling the big lie, claiming it would be disingenuous. "There were some in the drafting of the report that said, 'Well, we can claim progress,' " the administration official said. "There were others who said: 'Wait a second. Sure we can claim progress, but it's not credible to . . . just neglect the fact that it's had no effect on the ground.' "

A DoD official who has been skeptical of the escalation from the outset said he expects Petraeus to emphasize military progress, such as “improving security in Baghdad” and a reduction in the number of suicide attacks. But how does that translate to political progress? How does that improve the day-to-day lives of the Iraqi people? "Who cares how many neighborhoods of Baghdad are secured?" the official said. "Let's talk about the rest of the country: How come they have electricity twice a day, how come there is no running water?"

What I wouldn't give for a competent and functioning State Department

This is about as sane as that time Caligula made his horse a Senator.

The Bush administration has decided to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a "specially designated global terrorist organization.” This move will take place under Executive Order 13224, signed September 23, 2001. The EO authorizes the US to seize the assets of businesses, individuals and charities that the United States government identifies as having ties to terrorist organizations on the list. It also allows for the disruption of operations by foreign businesses that "provide support, services or assistance to, or otherwise associate with, terrorists."

The classification of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization is the first time a military branch of a sovereign government has been so designated.

The driving purpose of this move is to impinge upon the Revolutionary Guard’s far-reaching business interests, and as a cudgel to wield against foreign companies that do business with the Revolutionary Guard, and individual IRGC members.

"Anyone doing business with these people will have to reevaluate their actions immediately," said a U.S. official familiar with the plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the decision has not been announced. "It increases the risks of people who have until now ignored the growing list of sanctions against the Iranians. It makes clear to everyone who the IRGC and their related businesses really are. It removes the excuses for doing business with these people."

Expect this to set off a great hue and cry among U.S. allies and trading partners that do business with the Iranian military branches. China is Iran’s number one trading partner, and Russia has strong business ties with the IRGC.

Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear proliferation expert at the Center for American Progress fears that this move could have a deleterious effect on diplomatic efforts, "It would greatly complicate our efforts to solve the nuclear issue. It would tie an end to Iran's nuclear program to an end to its support of allies in Hezbollah and Hamas. The only way you could get a nuclear deal is as part of a grand bargain, which at this point is completely out of reach."