The Army and the mirror

Does anyone
know of any official Army publication that critiques and compares the
performance of Army generals in Iraq? I can't remember any, but 10 years is a
long time and there is a chance I have forgotten something.

I don't
mean individual articles in Military
Review or papers written at the Command and General Staff College. I've
read (and quoted) those in my last three books. What I mean is official
publications like On Point (which was
good) and On Point II (which wasn't).
That is, the studies that carry the imprint of a preface by a sponsoring
three-star or four-star officer.

If not, why
not? Is the Army really going to take the Lake Woebegone line that all its
generals were above average? Or is just going to fold its arms and believe that
such criticism is too rude for public discourse?

Speaking of
generals, I still haven't heard back from Lt. Gen. Huntoon about the nature of the
misconduct the IG found him to have committed.