Patraeus Predictable

[Hard Driver]

But what I have seen and read today on Genreal Patraeus's testimony, it is 100% predictable...

First, we need to stay the course.... This is the same story that has been bung for years.

Second, We are making progress... Do you know how mnay times this administration and this military has claimed we are making progress... Kind of reminds one of the story of the boy who cried wolf...

Third, the progress is in Anbar province.... This is the province that progress was being cited in in January when they announced the surge.. So why is the surge supposed to be responsible for this, when on 4,000 extra troops went there... What about the 26,000 who went to Bahgdad?

What does this mean...

It means we have sent thousands of troops and spend billions of dollars and the end result is a few spots of increased security.. However people are still being killed in sectarian violence and the Government of Iraq is not making progress on taking control of the country.

The problem in Iraq is not a military one! The sectarian violence is only going to be solved by a political compromise. General Patraeus is only going to accurately report on the military mission and the deaths involved... This is not the right person to discuss the diplomatic efforts of this country...

But that is the big problem, that there is no leading diplomatic effort to push the Iraqi government to make compromises to restore peace.. And if there is such a diplomatic effort, it might be more suitable to be lead by someone other than the USA.

So this whole "september progress report" is a non event. It is a continuation of the same road that has led us to knowhere. It does not answer any questions about how to create a peaceful Iraq or to present a plan to end a "war" that is really a police action quagmire.

 

[jb_1430]

The problem in Iraq is not a military one! The sectarian violence is only going to be solved by a political compromise. General Patraeus is only going to accurately report on the military mission and the deaths involved... This is not the right person to discuss the diplomatic efforts of this country...

Evidently you are relying on what youve been told about the testimony to Congress. Half of it came from the Ambassador.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Is this the early talking point out on the report? Discedit it by calling it "predictable".

 

[Reliant]

Is this the early talking point out on the report? Discedit it by calling it "predictable".

No, it will be discredited on it's own merit if, in fact, he was cherry-picking or "trying to cook the books for the White House" as widely believed. I see the major hurdle for this report is that the ambassador and the general gave their testimony at a time when the Bush administration's credibility on the war is at an all-time low with the American public. If we hadn't of been lied to so often by this dishonest Administration, I believe this report would have been taken as good news, or "making headway" at the very least.

 

[Hard Driver]

True

Evidently you are relying on what youve been told about the testimony to Congress. Half of it came from the Ambassador.

But then look at what the Ambassador said..

There has basically been no progress on the benchmarks and none should be expected in the next 6 months.

So more of the same there too.

The fact of the matter is that we have American troops dying over there and it better be for a good cause.. Right now the cause seems to be to buy time so that the war can be handed off to the next administration to protect the Bush legacy from taking all the blame for the failure... Note, that is a failure to acheive a neocon pipe dream. What other cause are we fighting for?

 

[Hard Driver]

Not so sure

If we hadn't of been lied to so often by this dishonest Administration, I believe this report would have been taken as good news, or "making headway" at the very least.

The "headway" is minimal. Bahgdad is not any measurably better and the "strides" made in Anbar is not on a national level and began prior to the surge.

 

[BigRob]

No, it will be discredited on it's own merit if, in fact, he was cherry-picking or "trying to cook the books for the White House" as widely believed. I see the major hurdle for this report is that the ambassador and the general gave their testimony at a time when the Bush administration's credibility on the war is at an all-time low with the American public. If we hadn't of been lied to so often by this dishonest Administration, I believe this report would have been taken as good news, or "making headway" at the very least.

What gain does he have to "cook the books for the White House"? Most people on Congress perhaps disagree with what he outlines, but most, most, of them do not think he was "cooking the books" for anyone.

 

[Reliant]

What gain does he have to "cook the books for the White House"? Most people on Congress perhaps disagree with what he outlines, but most, most, of them do not think he was "cooking the books" for anyone.

I don't believe he has anything to gain, and I don't believe he was "cooking the books" (whatever that means). He may have stressed the gains a little too much and skipped over the failures, I don't know. What I do know for sure is that he has given a report to Congress. If the report is true, and we will see in the next few weeks, then I consider it an "upbeat" report. And Heaven knows, we need some good news from that hell-hole.

 

[berreal]

Its a fore drawn conclusion ...bush lied his way into Iraq and he has never stopped lieing since.

Here's whats unbelieveable to me ...the low expectations republicans put on our millitary.
Look... we have highly trained solidiers, we vastly out-number Al Queda in Iraq, we have better weapons, we have armoury, our troops even eat better. Why would anybody think we couldn't defeat a handfull of mal-nourish men running around in slippers?? How low was the expectation?? All along everbody knows nothing meaningfull will happen unless the Iraqis take charge.

We go in, al queda move out and wait ...violence goes down for a while ...we leave ....they come back!

So to that end ...to think with all this advantage we are barely holding our own speaks volumes of our leadership!!

Now that said the orginal post made a valid point. All bush has done over the years is change the generals when he see any sign of dissention ...Petraus still being there only says he's in bed with bush philosophy ...and the circus continued yesterday! Its laughable when people try to suggest these generals are above politics or above the fray!

But it also pin-point another glaring failure ...and that is the democrats!! Pelosi and Reed should be banned from going to Washington!! They are weak and spineless and even if bush have a 0% approval ratings he would still send them cowering!! Game over ...if they can't stand up to bush ...they can't lead!! The surge should never have been allowed to commence. Who couldn't see that this was just a ruse to string things out? All bush did then after 5 years of failure was...RE-START THE CLOCK!!!


And as ususal the nauseating on-going failure in Iraq ..is being cheered on by the right. Its as if the hypocrites see the 1,800 Iraqis killed last month as some sort of game.

But Democrats should have seen that ...they were elected for a reason ..and they failed! Instead Pelosi and just about every democrat think the American people elected them to *****!! I'm sorry but this puts all the democratic candidate in a bad light to me. Because even if they didn't support bush ...they had a responsibility to put fire to the tail of their counterparts for being a wus!!! If all they could do was hold the money ...then let the freaking troops go hungry..until bus cave-in!!


Since elected the only resolve democrats showed ..they only thing they seem to want to go to the mat for ...are illegal immigrants ...go figure!!


Stick a fork in it..I give up..... as an independent ..I just might stay home in '08!

 

[Popeye]

What gain does he have to "cook the books for the White House"? Most people on Congress perhaps disagree with what he outlines, but most, most, of them do not think he was "cooking the books" for anyone.

He, more than cooked the books, he burnt the books. As he has always done whatever his "daddy" George Bush says. What a good little boy General Betray-us is.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

He, more than cooked the books, he burnt the books. As he has always done whatever his "daddy" George Bush says. What a good little boy General Betray-us is.

Popeye, I know your a lib and all but you still should show respect for General Petraeus. He is widely regarded as one of the most brilliant military minds of this generation and he literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency. Not to mention is dozens of medals and decortations. It's the least you could do for someone willing to risk their life to defend your pathetic one.

 

[Popeye]

Popeye, I know your a lib and all but you still should show respect for General Petraeus. He is widely regarded as one of the most brilliant military minds of this generation and he literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency. Not to mention is dozens of medals and decortations. It's the least you could do for someone willing to risk their life to defend your pathetic one.

Oh, excuse me, just because he's a Republican General I should automatically respect him. You forgot that I also should respect him because he condones the killing of innocent civilians "collateral damage" no less.

 

[BigRob]

He, more than cooked the books, he burnt the books. As he has always done whatever his "daddy" George Bush says. What a good little boy General Betray-us is.

Any evidence of this? Or just you yelling about nothing. War sucks, there is always collateral damage, no one is upset that we firebombed Dresden and Tokyo and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians under those "democratic" generals.

Give me a break, offer some evidence to prove the General cooked the books, or just shut up.

 

[Popeye]

Any evidence of this? Or just you yelling about nothing. War sucks, there is always collateral damage, no one is upset that we firebombed Dresden and Tokyo and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians under those "democratic" generals.

Give me a break, offer some evidence to prove the General cooked the books, or just shut up.

You actually believe the General gave an "independent" report? Just plain common sense should tell you otherwise. Also, so called "collateral damage" is not acceptable, particularly in a unjust, ill-advised, Republican, war of choice.

 

[Reliant]

Give me a break, offer some evidence to prove the General cooked the books, or just shut up.

Why does everyone on this "Political" Forum have to "shut up" if they don't fall into lockstep with the right? Here is a valid question.... Where is a Left-Wing Moderator the rest of us can piss and moan to when we don't like what the right has to say?