home

Another Question for Petraeus

stemming from this WaPo article:

For two hours, President Bush listened to contrasting visions of the U.S. future in Iraq. Gen. David H. Petraeus dominated the conversation by video link from Baghdad, making the case to keep as many troops as long as possible to cement any security progress. Adm. William J. Fallon, his superior, argued instead for accepting more risks in Iraq, officials said, in order to have enough forces available to confront other potential threats in the region.

The polite discussion in the White House Situation Room a week ago masked a sharper clash over the U.S. venture in Iraq, one that has been building since Fallon, chief of the U.S. Central Command, which oversees Middle East operations, sent a rear admiral to Baghdad this summer to gather information. Soon afterward, officials said, Fallon began developing plans to redefine the U.S. mission and radically draw down troops. . . .

. . . [Fallon's] efforts offended Petraeus's team, which saw them as unwelcome intrusion on their own long-term planning. The profoundly different views of the U.S. role in Iraq only exacerbated the schism between the two men.

"Bad relations?" said a senior civilian official with a laugh. "That's the understatement of the century. . . . If you think Armageddon was a riot, that's one way of looking at it."

Q: General Petraeus, is the view you are espousing regarding the Surge the consensus view of the Pentagon and your superiors? Could you comment on this report by the Washington Post?

< On Petraeus: The Manufacturing Of A Storyline | Open Thread and Diary Rescue >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    As the king keeps telling us, (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dulcinea on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 10:02:48 AM EST
    he listens to the generals, and Fallon is an admiral.  That 'splains everything.

    In this brave new world, military underlings overrule their superiors and here we have Patraeus overruling Fallon.

    You may want to brush up (none / 0) (#3)
    by Wile ECoyote on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 07:06:05 PM EST
    on the Korean war and the Inchon landings.  JCS was against it, Big Mac won out.

    Parent
    Fallon "happy" with Petraeus' testimony (none / 0) (#2)
    by robrecht on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 01:01:21 PM EST
    The last paragraph of the WaPo article BTD cites:

    "In an interview Friday, Fallon said he and Petraeus have reached accommodation about tomorrow's testimony. "The most important thing is I'm very happy with what Dave has recommended," he said. As for the earlier discussions, he begged off. "It's too politically charged right now."

    This is, of course, an issue to be aware of but I would expect Petraeus' message to be carefully scrutinized by his superiors prior to his testimony.  I think he had some type of "murder board" last night, perhaps with the joint chiefs of staff in attendance.  I heard something to that effect but I don't really know the details.