(CHICAGO)(December 13, 2006) Worldwide exclusives don’t grow on trees. Or drop into your lap every day. Internet competition with the “mainstream” media is ferocious. Nevertheless, we at ContrarianCommentary.com pride ourselves on going lead-to-lead with larger media organizations. From Baghdad to Boston, and Washington to Waziristan, we have the unique sources and resources to assemble and analyze developments. Unfortunately, we dropped a big one.

     In mid-September our antennas at the pentagon picked up a major military expansion being planned for after the election. I drafted a headline: “Worldwide Exclusive: Bush to Order Iraq Buildup After the Election.” We were reporting from sources inside the Pentagon and intelligence community that the administration was gearing up for a show of force after November 7th.

     Then we dropped the ball. The story was blocked out and outlined, but never written. Frankly, we were distracted by the hugger mugger of the election. As Executive Editor, I take the blame. How could we drop a big one? Only human, I guess. All I can say is that we did, and we apologize to our readers.

     The story in September was that we had tapped into intelligence sources that detailed how a massive buildup was under way for an expansion of U. S. forces in Iraq after the election. We got the pieces of the puzzle and, to mix metaphors, closed the circle.

     Thus, we were not surprised when, in early November, our colleagues at the Washington Post belatedly began reporting the same information.

     Now to December. Do you wonder why Bush is so calm, so placid about his “policy” for Iraq? Why he delayed an announcement into January? The reason is that the president has known for some time that a buildup would be orchestrated after the election.

     All of the Pentagon “studies” and analyses currently being done are eyewash for a done deal. A long done deal. Force levels in Iraq are going up. This tune is worthy of Kenny Rogers and “The Gambler.” Bush sits calmly because he knows what the policy is going to be long before it is announced.

     As we will detail in a subsequent column, bulking up the force is the only way out. Bush is being forced to eat crow and follow a “limited, modified hangout” of the General Shinseki plan for policing the peace in Iraq.

     Merely threatening Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki would be meaningless unless it was backed up by strength and presence. A police force can’t intimidate the bad guys by withdrawing from the streets. Just ask former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

     The reason my sources leaked to me in September was because they knew there was a political dimension to the buildup-in-progress. Bush knew he has a very limited window to deploy additional forces: before the Democrats gained a stranglehold and psychological edge in Congress. And so the foundation was laid for a post-election buildup.

     The buildup is being described as “temporary.” Yah, sure. The entire American presence in Iraq is “temporary.” The increased force which is being planned for Iraq will remain much longer than politicians now expect. Once in place, the more robust force will be essential to keeping the lid on.

     The buildup will come in stages. First, an announcement of the increased force levels for Iraq. Then, somewhat more quietly, a recruiting drive to increase active duty force levels by 100,000 new service personnel. Or more.

     All this is being sold to the public as militarily-driven, i.e. that the “military” is asking for more troops and sees a need for enhanced presence in Iraq. In point of fact, the “military” is only dusting off the analyses that were done in 2002-2003 when Army Chief of Staff Shinseki predicted the need for a massive peacetime force to pacify Iraq.

     The reality is that Bush bit off more than he could chew, that he failed horribly to realize that Rumsfeld’s “small” force concepts were only applicable to the shooting phase of a war and that they had no relevance to the need for a massive peacetime deployment.

     Indeed, the final nail in the neo-cons’ Middle East coffin will be the post-election, pre-Democratic-Congress buildup. (Remember, these are the same morons who gave us the Israeli summer 2006 war to punch Iran in the nose, which ended up punching Israel in the stomach.)

     Finally, don’t get me wrong on the big picture. The Iraq war was ignited by neo-con political jerks, not aggressive military personnel. The “small force, non-occupation, immediate withdrawal” contingent driving this failed policy was composed of civilians, not soldiers.

     The Army always knew that invading Iraq was a loser. Even with a newly beefed up presence we will still be on the defensive. Soldiers--men and women who have to make life and death decisions--could not afford the dilettantism of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz & Co. Belatedly Bush is genuflecting to the generals, and massing forces to make a statement. We will not be moved out of Iraq unless and until.

     Now if Bush would only listen to his generals, who are working up plans for the final withdrawal. Generals are not brave men when it comes to confronting the civilian leadership of the Pentagon. No, siree. But they are competent managers of their troops; they want to hit hard, win, resolve the conflict and get out. They warned in advance of March, 2003 what would happen, and they were right.

     They told me in September the buildup was coming. And they were right again. They are trying to right our policy in Iraq, and they are right for a trifecta.

     Again, my apologies for not reporting the planned buildup in September. But we are now first with an exclusive analysis of the past preparations and the future implications of this “policy-in-progress.”