General Petraeus is a political animal. All members of the general corps are, but Petraeus in particular subscribes to the Neo Con American global hegemonic design. And his Central Command posting and Afghanistan 'surge' strategy is a political maneuver on behalf of Neo Con ideological preservation.

[If you doubt that Neo Conism represents a distinct ideological shift in the DOD and Joints Chiefs of Staff, just examine the long list of generals/admirals who have been ostracized, forced to retire, diminished, publicly denounced by the Neo Con executive and civilian leadership].

Kaplan correctly distinguished between Afghanistan and Iraq, as Applebaum did in a previous article. But Kaplan missed the idea that America failed to assist Afghanistan in 2003 when they declined cooperation fron Iran.

At this point, America is waging 'war' with Iran by violating its airspace, supporting Iranian insurgent groups, and sending American covert operations into Iran for everything from pre assault intel to sabotage and abduction. Since Iran was rejected and is now under attack by America AND Israel continues the Neo Con rhetoric of attacking Iran, Neo Con regional strategy has once again pushed Iran to assist whichever insurgent groups are fighting America.

So while the Neo Con politicalized 'surge' occurs just before the November elections and various highly publicized campaigns probably in October can be used by McCain as evidence of Neo con 'Wins', the uncalculable factors which are far more dangerous is the potential for Iran to support Afghani insurgents as well as support Pakistan's insurgency to offset American gains in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In the end, all of Petraeus' command decisions between NOW and December should be seen through the lense of the presidential campaign and serving, however briefly, GOP and Neo Con advantages.