Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Petraeus Admits "I Don't Know" If White House Plan on Iraq Makes America Safer

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 06:22 PM
Original message
Petraeus Admits "I Don't Know" If White House Plan on Iraq Makes America Safer
Jon Soltz

Petraeus Admits "I Don't Know" If White House Plan on Iraq Makes America Safer

Posted September 11, 2007 | 04:35 PM (EST)

General Petraeus today made a stunning admission, conceding "I don't know" if the course of action recommended in Iraq makes America safer:

WARNER: I hope in the recesses of your heart that you know that strategy will continue the casualties, stress on our forces, stress on military families, stress on all Americans. Are you able to say at this time, if we continue what you have laid before the Congress, this strategy, that if you continue, you are making America safer?

PETRAEUS: Sir, I believe that this is indeed the best course of action to achieve our objections in Iraq.

WARNER: Does that make America safer?

PETRAEUS: Sir, I don't know actually. I have not sat down and sorted out in my own mind. What I have focused on and been riveted on is how to accomplish the mission of the Multinational Force in Iraq.

This exchange verifies the argument VoteVets.org has been making, that General Petraeus' job is not to take those things into account, and therefore the President is hiding behind General Petraeus.

Let me explain.

General Petraeus was given an order -- find a military solution for Iraq where there is none, and without concern for troop overextension or the larger war on terror. General Petraeus followed his orders, giving the president what he wanted to hear, and now the president will hide behind that to justify his failure as a commander in chief.

General Petraeus has a very limited area of concern -- the US military in Iraq -- and his testimony today reflected that.

When one looks at the grander scale, past just the military in Iraq, the picture is dismal, and becoming a critical danger. From the Government Accountability Office report to Congressional Research Service report to the report by General Jones, it is clear that there has been no political reconciliation overall in Iraq or increased security, despite our military's strongest efforts.

From Admiral Fallon to Admiral Mullen, those above General Petraeus in the chain of command are telling the president that this war is hurting our military and our global security. The president has chosen to ignore all of this, in favor of a report based on a false premise with faulty findings, signed by a General with a very limited scope of concern. Call it denial, or call it stubbornness, or whatever you want; it all boils down to the same thing -- this president still refuses to listen to those he needs to listen to, in favor of those who tell him what he wants to hear.

Unwittingly, General Petraeus just confirmed all of that in the exchange above, today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. every president needs a parrot, and bush has his now nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superkia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. As he sits there with all his medals looking pretty.
Edited on Tue Sep-11-07 07:45 PM by superkia
I like when he pointed out that Iraq had a general that has already been wounded a couple of times and is still out there fighting the battle. I thought hey get your ass out there with him and see how great things are going you douche bag!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. IMO, if he couldn't answer "YES" the lying General KNOWS.
It's mindnumbing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. Honestly, I think it was an inappropriate question.
Edited on Tue Sep-11-07 08:04 PM by Marr
It's not his job to evaluate policy. He's a general-- he's supposed to set strategy and achieve specific goals, nothing more. I don't want generals talking policy, just as I don't want the Joint Chiefs to tell Bush "no", even though I despise Bush's ideology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. exactly right
it's not his place to judge the policy itself - it's his job to implement it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peaches2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Bush put him in that role
This was the most important sentence of everything he said for 2 days. Bush put him in front of Congress to back up the Adm.'s policy. If the man can't say the war he is running is making us safer (that is all the President is supposed to do according to the Constitution) then we shouldn't be there. How any Repug can back Bush now is beyond comprehension.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NancyBreen Donating Member (146 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-11-07 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. Thanks to Warner for asking the right question.
Why do all these WH appointees sound the same? Listening to any hearing, one could learn how to avoid answering any question and skirt any issue asked. Is there a spin school in the WH?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 06:08 AM
Response to Original message
8. Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BLUSH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
9. Jeff Spicoli?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
10. Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC