Does The Surge Make Us Safer? Petraeus: I Don't Know

By Big Tent Democrat, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:20:37 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Chris Matthews is hammering this question, from Senator John Warner, and answer, from General Petraeus.

Warner asked Petraeus point blank, will the policy you are recommending make the United States safer. And General Petraeus, in my opinion, to his credit, said he did not know, that he was focused on accomplishing the mission given to him.

And you know what? It is not Petraeus' call to decide what the mission is. It is the job of the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States to argue for his own policy. But it is the job of the Congress to decide whether it will fund the policy the President recommends.

Joe Biden was on with Matthews. And he was saying we should leave Iraq. But this same Joe Biden says he will vote to fund Bush's Debacle. That is an indefensible position.

Via Spencer again, General Petraeus attempts to revise and extend his remarks but, imo, is not particularly successful:

< Tuesday Open Thread | Lieberman Asks For War With Iran; Petraeus Turns Him Down >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Does The Surge Make Us Safer? Petraeus: I Don't Know | 36 comments (36 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Thanks for live blogging this (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by glanton on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:40:31 PM EST

Heh (none / 0) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:43:18 PM EST

But I did not.

I could not today.

Sorry.


Oh Well, (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by glanton on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:58:01 PM EST

For my purposes, you may as well be. I'm getting almost every single bit of my information about the whole spectacle from this site.

Anyway, after the strong thread about MoveOn, I wanted to articulate a thank you here. Not always in agreement, but always appreciative.


BTW (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:11:33 PM EST

THIS moment also highlights the stupidity of the Move On ad.


: I understand your point (none / 0) (#18)
by glanton on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:32:44 PM EST

This was the moment I think (none / 0) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:02:00 PM EST

You haven't missed much. Lots of (none / 0) (#4)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:45:12 PM EST

repetition from yesterday. Sen. Kerry needs a new hairdo.


I love the still in the youtube (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:45:30 PM EST

Petraeus with his hands up.

: He shrugged while one senator was (none / 0) (#6)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:47:24 PM EST

talking. May have been Feingold.

Did you guys see Tweety (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:52:28 PM EST

jump down the Christian Broadcasting Network's throat?

And then call Dem chicken?

Tweety looks ready to join the Out of Iraq Blogger Causus.

Edger, send the invite!

: I googled (tm) "Tweety," came up (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:02:43 PM EST

w/Tweety Bird, moved on to Google news, came up w/BTD's post on MoveOn's NYT ad. At the same time, a Republican senator from Texas is droning on about the ad in the Senate hrgs. 6 degrees of separation.
P.S. Edger, I figured out the tweety reference.

All I saw (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by tnthorpe on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 11:16:37 PM EST

was a lot of pious handwringing while people die. The Bush Administration is playing yet another round of "FIND A RATIONALE FOR PERMANENT WAR" : tried WMDs, didn't work; cried 9/11 24/7 and made Iraq the leading front in the GWOT; tried REGIME CHANGE, after the fact; denied OIL; tried DEMOCRATIZATION, no go there: now it's time for PREVENTING REGIONAL CATASTROPHE; next up IRAN IS BAD. Disgusting altogether. Meanwhile, serious senators ask serious questions of a serious general. Skeptical words are cheap in the absence of action to end this illegal, immoral war. No, kids, war doesn't make you safe, read the da*n Iliad. This surge, another increase in a war that's been nothing but lies, malfeasance, and pocket-lining for the Halliburton set, is just like the larger war which hasn't made anything safe except Bush's political career.

Most sobering moment in the Petraeus hearings. (none / 0) (#3)
by Saul on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:44:58 PM EST

I had just posted this on your previous thread:

Warner ask Petraeus if he continues doing what he is doing in Iraq is this making American safer.
Petreaus said "I don't know if it is". Boy what bummer. This speaks volumes of whether we should be there or not and as far as I am concern why should we spend one more American life or one more dollar based on that answer.

I disagree (none / 0) (#29)
by libertarian soldier on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 07:49:50 AM EST

Why expect the commander of forces in Iraq to make assessments on the domestic security situation here? The question would more properly be addressed to someone who looks both at Iraq and the US, such as the DNI, the CJCS, the SECDEF or the NSA.


Good point (1.00 / 1) (#30)
by Slado on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 10:28:34 AM EST

You can't have it both ways. You can't call Patreaus a administration mouthpiece then complain when he doesn't asnwer an obviously loaded political question.

If he had said yes you guys would have jumped on him for what would obviously been an asnwer he had no buisness answering.

The answer he gave actualy shows how credible he is and how far off the dems/libs are on him.

His job is to win the war. The surge is working. That it doesn't fit into the grand opinion of the democratic base isn't his concern and to call him a liar only makes the left look silly.


Define winning. (5.00 / 0) (#31)
by Edger on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 10:45:34 AM EST

The surge is working?

Obviously loaded political question? You have little faith in Petraeus professional opinion. Or you don't care to hear it as much as he doesn't care to give it.

BTW, Petraeus did tell us in his WAPO op-ed three years ago how well things were going in Iraq.

Funny he doesn't want to give his opinion on a related question, and you'd rather not hear his opinion on another related question.

Related to the extent that it was the implied reason for the invasion of Iraq in the first place.

You might want to ask some Iraqis how well the surge is working...

Saba Ali Ihsaan, Baghdad, Irak

The American "surge" as with everything else they have done is a failure.
...
There is only one measure of progress that matters in Irak and that is the progress in chewing the invader forces into pieces and then spitting them out. Progress on that is excellent.
They came here as predators and now they are prey. The only thing an American understands is force, we sand nig*ers know a thing or two about that.

Define winning.


: It is time to end the occupation. (none / 0) (#32)
by Edger on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 11:36:05 AM EST

It is time to leave Iraq.

Defund. (none / 0) (#7)
by Edger on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 04:48:06 PM EST

Joe Biden.

Warner was very helpful (none / 0) (#12)
by robrecht on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:06:11 PM EST

He introduced a level of sincerity and depth that Petraeus could not but respond to truthfully.

I listened yesterday and today as much as I could but only with only one ear while I tried to work. This exchange was riveting.

Ambassador says if it is known (none / 0) (#13)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:10:24 PM EST

the surge forces are being withdrawn and there will never be a second surge bad things will happen in Iraq!

Hillary on C-Span (none / 0) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:12:29 PM EST

Here statement was very good. Don't care (none / 0) (#16)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:17:25 PM EST

too much for her first question.


I lost track of what she was asking (none / 0) (#17)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:31:15 PM EST

Frankly, I would have expected her to try and get a sound byte.


: She looked very tired and mentioned she (none / 0) (#19)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 05:37:21 PM EST

started her day at ground zero for commemoration and reading of the names of those who died there.
I thought she had already sent her questions for these two men to the President.

frankly, (none / 0) (#20)
by cpinva on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 07:12:55 PM EST

it was an idiotic question to begin with. absolutely nothing we do in iraq is going to make america safer. that warner asked it with a straight face tells you how good an actor he is.

that petraeus answered it semi-seriously tells you how good an actor he is.

since the odds of all the insurgents in iraq hopping a rogue freighter, and coming to america, are nil to none, whatever we do there has zero effect on the safety of our home shores.

next question please.

Did the 9/11insurgents arrive by (none / 0) (#22)
by oculus on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 07:23:20 PM EST

freighter?


no, but then (1.00 / 2) (#23)
by cpinva on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 10:08:12 PM EST

they weren't wearing robes, carrying ak-47's, and smelling really bad. also, most came from saudi arabia, not iraq or iran.

of course, if the fbi had done its job, none of them would ever have made it into the cockpit of a 747.

ding! next troll please!


oculus is no troll (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 10:09:18 PM EST

My ephitat. (none / 0) (#27)
by oculus on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 12:16:55 AM EST

: gesundheit (none / 0) (#33)
by cpinva on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 12:26:00 PM EST

Perhaps you have heard (1.00 / 1) (#25)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 10:37:57 PM EST

of Chinese Firewalls and someone named Gorelick?

I understand she hung out with the Clinton Administration..


Leaving this one for Edger. (none / 0) (#28)
by oculus on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 12:17:21 AM EST

Well... some of his comments (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Edger on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 12:33:22 PM EST

are just so far out there, they're not even worth a response.


I know who Gorelick is but can't connect (none / 0) (#35)
by oculus on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 12:58:26 PM EST

the dots here. Nonsequitur.


: It was just a troll comment. (none / 0) (#36)
by Edger on Wed Sep 12, 2007 at 01:31:53 PM EST

Trolling for any responses. Making sense was not the purpose of it.

The indefensible position ... (none / 0) (#21)
by chemoelectric on Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 07:13:33 PM EST

... is Randi Rhodes's as well as Joe Biden's. AAR's top host, mind you. Today, before I switched her off for the third day in a row, she was, implicitly, blaming her listeners for not calling 'Republicans' enough to get them to vote to end the occupation. This gives you some idea how much we are up against, if AAR's top host is this far off base.

Fortunately the rest of AAR isn't like this.