From last night’s Special Report with Brit Hume :

–On the Surge–

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER:But the linchpin of this whole plan, is Maliki and his government, and that’s the weakness, it’s always been the weakness. I’m skeptical about the surge because it’s in defense of a government that I see is hopelessly sectarian. Now, the president and the administration are insisting that it’s . . . redeemably sectarian. And the argument is in chaos, you’re going to have the sectarians running around killing each other, but if you can stabilize Baghdad, they’ll have less reason to have the support of Shiite militias and then you can control them.
The man I think counts here is not the Generals Casey and Abizaid, . . . it’s David Petraeus, the man who literally wrote the manual on counter-insurgency. He says give him the tools, this search, and most importantly, actually, a change in the rules of engagement — much more aggressive than we’ve had before. Give me that, and I can do it. And I think we ought to give him and the president the benefit of the doubt, give them six months and see if it can be controlled.
FRED BARNES: [T]here was some opposition but not at the levels that the Democrats thought and hoped would be there. It turns out now . . . that General Casey wanted a smaller increase but actually wanted it and was willing to go for an increase of 9,000 troops. That’s hardly what would make that much of a difference, but in any case, it’s something.
And look, you can pick and choose your generals, you know, I mean, if Democrats want to find people opposed to this in the military, there are a lot of retired generals who will tell them that. But, you know, everybody respects General Petraeus and he is the man here, he’s been to Iraq before. He is the premiere rising star in the Army.
KRAUTHAMMER: There have been mistakes, and mistakes are enormous. If it had been my choice I would not have done this, but given mistakes and the fact the president is going to do it, I think it would undercut our efforts, make it more difficult if you get, for example, a Congress openly opposing it as it’s planning to do, passing resolutions of nonconfidence in the middle of a war on a tactical maneuver, I think it’s a mistake.
If you want to say you know, then have a vote to withdraw completely. But to hamper a president and a tactical change I think is a mistake in the middle of a war.