More troops for Iraq

I've seen this line of argument in several places over the last twenty-four hours coming from several sources. (Maybe most explicitly here. Or more simply here.)

If, as the president expressed several times over the last week, Al Qaeda sees Iraq as its "central front" in the war on terror, why are we getting reports out of Anbar of a stalemate, a losing battle, and not enough troops from the one place in Iraq where Al Qaeda is known to be centered?

That's a really good question. It was asked in the gaggle today and answered, "we rely on the generals for troop levels" or somesuch. In other words, the administration is laying the groundwork to blame the generals for the failure in Iraq.

On the other hand, the fact that these types of things are starting to leak out of the military tells me that they are already seeing the endgame and that their concern is to distance themselves from the failure by pointing back at the administration.

The fact that this is beginning means the military and the Bush administration are finally recognizing the failure of the Iraq war.

(subquestion: Has the tipping point been reached on the politics of Iraq?)