Petraeus: Partial Iraq troop exit possible in 08

  1. #1
    kygirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 06
    Location
    NE KY- Its the engine not the horn that makes the car move.
    Posts
    4,282

    Petraeus: Partial Iraq troop exit possible in 08

    WASHINGTON - Gen. David Petraeus told Congress on Monday he envisions the withdrawal of roughly 30,000 U.S. combat troops from Iraq by next summer.

    In long-awaited testimony, the commanding general of the war said last winter's buildup in U.S. troops had met its military objectives "in large measure."

    As a result, he told a congressional hearing and a nationwide television audience, "I believe that we will be able to reduce our forces to the pre-surge level ... by next summer without jeopardizing the security gains we have fought so hard to achieve."

    www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20689394
    Advertisement

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 02
    Posts
    32,704

    Is today when he was going to be in front of Biden's committee or is that on Tuesday? Biden has already said he completely disagrees with the General on his assessment.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 03
    Location
    I like taters...
    Posts
    9,317

    Yeah, Biden is a qualified military expert.

    The hubris and lack of any sense of humility of these political clowns is mind boggling. They know more about settling armed conflicts than West Point graduates... Sheesh...

    I met Joe Biden in Delaware a couple of years ago... more like Joseph Bin Biden.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 01
    Location
    Martinsville, Virginia
    Posts
    17,914

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastbreak
    Yeah, Biden is a qualified military expert.

    The hubris and lack of any sense of humility of these political clowns is mind boggling. They know more about settling armed conflicts than West Point graduates... Sheesh...

    I met Joe Biden in Delaware a couple of years ago... more like Joseph Bin Biden.

    First of all I agree with you about taking a West Point man's word over Biden any day.

    But I would have the same complaint to those in this White House that ignored early military leaders (Powell and others) who told them that their estimations of troop strength needed and feasability of mission completion was way off. Of course many scoffed those military leaders, only from the other side of the debate.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 03
    Location
    I like taters...
    Posts
    9,317

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatz
    First of all I agree with you about taking a West Point man's word over Biden any day.

    But I would have the same complaint to those in this White House that ignored early military leaders (Powell and others) who told them that their estimations of troop strength needed and feasability of mission completion was way off. Of course many scoffed those military leaders, only from the other side of the debate.
    In six years, I've yet to hear anyone offer a better solution. Al Qaida attacked us... not the other way around. We had to do something following 9/11. Those who say we should have not responded don't understand the enemy we're up against.

    I agree that anyone that suggested that this would be short work was way off base, but we really had no choice but to fight back. The use of Iraq as a magnet to draw in terrorists and insurgents where we can fight them on manageable terrain was sheer brilliance IMO. The Afghans fought the mighty Soviet Army to a standstill for over a decade in the mountains of that country. Iraq was the better choice.

    It is nothing more than political gamesmanship for politicians to attempt to upstage Petraeus. 9 times out of 10 they come off looking like the boobs they are.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 03
    Location
    Palm Desert, CA
    Posts
    23,817

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastbreak
    In six years, I've yet to hear anyone offer a better solution. Al Qaida attacked us... not the other way around. We had to do something following 9/11. Those who say we should have not responded don't understand the enemy we're up against.
    Hang on there pardner. Are we talking about Iraq or Afghanistan? We had little choice but to hit Afghanistan hard. Iraq should have never been invaded.

  7. #7
    Hearsay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 05
    Location
    W. 35th St. brownstone
    Posts
    10,478

    I came close to my breaking point today. The behavior - the cowardice - of the Democratic committeepersons in their questioning of Petreaus today, when they had not seen his report but had already made up their minds that they were going to dispute it, the public accusation that he was "sent" to them and was "told" what to say (in essence, General you were sent to lie to us today), is so cowardly, so base, I'm not really sure that I would not now lie, cheat, and steal to prevent one of those cowards from taking office . . .

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 03
    Location
    I like taters...
    Posts
    9,317

    Quote Originally Posted by HHSDad
    Hang on there pardner. Are we talking about Iraq or Afghanistan? We had little choice but to hit Afghanistan hard. Iraq should have never been invaded.
    Both. I agree that we had to hit Afghanistan, but to stay there as a place to draw in other terrorists and extremist insurgents would have been disasterous in terms of tactics and terrain. Iraq was a far better option for this reason, which is why we're there IMO.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 00
    Location
    Louisville, Ky USA
    Posts
    4,547

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastbreak
    Both. I agree that we had to hit Afghanistan, but to stay there as a place to draw in other terrorists and extremist insurgents would have been disasterous in terms of tactics and terrain. Iraq was a far better option for this reason, which is why we're there IMO.
    Good Lord. How many kids are you willing to see killed for that nonsense. We needed to hit those that hit us and hit them hard. We did not need to go into Iraq. It has been a terrible waste of our young people and has made the United States less safe. I believe that General Petraeus is giving his honest assessment of the situation. The real question is not military. I believe that our military can take any objective we give them. The real question is how many American lives arwe we willing to spend while the Iraqis decide whether or not to put aside their centuries long grudges.

  10. #10
    shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 01
    Location
    Erlanger
    Posts
    3,605

    As I listened to some of the comments of the Democratic committee persons, I was struck by the hypocrisy of those who were so brazenly ignoring what the General had to say even before he had said it when it was just a short time ago these same Democrats were canvassing the country to find retired Generals who disagreed with Bush's Iraq policy for the sole purpose of lambasting Dubya for ignoring them.

  11. #11
    titletownclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 02
    Location
    Danville, KY
    Posts
    8,052

    Quote Originally Posted by Hearsay
    I came close to my breaking point today. The behavior - the cowardice - of the Democratic committeepersons in their questioning of Petreaus today, when they had not seen his report but had already made up their minds that they were going to dispute it, the public accusation that he was "sent" to them and was "told" what to say (in essence, General you were sent to lie to us today), is so cowardly, so base, I'm not really sure that I would not now lie, cheat, and steal to prevent one of those cowards from taking office . . .
    I watched Petraeus' testimony today on Fox and was awed by the line of questioning from the Dems. The Dems are obviously relying on the public's perceived failures in the Iraqi War to guarantee successes in the 08 elections. The Dems cower from positive Iraqi War news like a vampire cowers from sunlight.

  12. #12

    Quote Originally Posted by titletownclown
    I watched Petraeus' testimony today on Fox and was awed by the line of questioning from the Dems. The Dems are obviously relying on the public's perceived failures in the Iraqi War to guarantee successes in the 08 elections. The Dems cower from positive Iraqi War news like a vampire cowers from sunlight.

    I couldn't have said it better myself.

    I have to believe that Bush was advised, pre-Iraq invasion, by the Republican political types of the extreme political risk he was taking for himself and the Republican party if the invasion was not successful. Bush did the right thing and ignored their advise and then did what he felt was best for our national interests. Bush may or may not be dumb, but there is no doubt in my mind that he put what he thought was in our best national interests ahead of his own and his party's best interests.

    Compare that with the conduct of Democrats like Biden. They are using the public sentiment (which has been heavily influenced by the main street media against the war) to win the White House. It's actually rather sad to see the party that I was raised on, but left due to dissatisfaction in my 20s, further denigrate itself. It's truly sad to see these Democratic "leaders" (it almost makes me vomit to use that word in association with people like Biden) so crassly question the integrity of a man that they themselves had praised just so few months ago when they approved him to lead our forces in Iraq. I fully realize and agree that not all Democrats are like Biden and friends, but it bothers me and scares me that far too many people at the top of the Democratic party are like him.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 69
    Posts
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by leatherneck

    I have to believe that Bush was advised, pre-Iraq invasion, by the Republican political types of the extreme political risk he was taking for himself and the Republican party if the invasion was not successful. Bush did the right thing and ignored their advise and then did what he felt was best for our national interests. Bush may or may not be dumb, but there is no doubt in my mind that he put what he thought was in our best national interests ahead of his own and his party's best interests.
    However, SUCCESSFUL political leaders have to know that part of governing is using good PR skills. George W. STINKS at that.

    I'm glad that he is willing to take a stand and do what he thinks is the right thing, but I would be happier if he had also been as adept at communicating to the people. Reagan would bypass the media (& their bias) by doing just that.

  14. #14

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluto
    However, SUCCESSFUL political leaders have to know that part of governing is using good PR skills. George W. STINKS at that.

    I'm glad that he is willing to take a stand and do what he thinks is the right thing, but I would be happier if he had also been as adept at communicating to the people. Reagan would bypass the media (& their bias) by doing just that.

    I don't disagree that Bush's communication and public speaking skills stink. I think that many of his decisions have been correct, but he has done a terrible job of telling the American people of his rationale for those decisions.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 03
    Location
    I like taters...
    Posts
    9,317

    Quote Originally Posted by Trinity alum
    Good Lord. How many kids are you willing to see killed for that nonsense. We needed to hit those that hit us and hit them hard. We did not need to go into Iraq. It has been a terrible waste of our young people and has made the United States less safe. I believe that General Petraeus is giving his honest assessment of the situation. The real question is not military. I believe that our military can take any objective we give them. The real question is how many American lives arwe we willing to spend while the Iraqis decide whether or not to put aside their centuries long grudges.
    I would that no American of any age had to risk his or her life to protect the freedoms of this nation. Unfortunately, we are surrounded by genuinely evil individuals, groups and nations who want nothing more than to tear this country apart. We do not have the option of remaining neutral. We were attacked, we had to fight back or suffer increased boldness and assault at the hands of an enemy with which we will never be able to negotiate a peace.

    I've already expressed my opinion that the geographic features of Iraq are more friendly to our fighting forces than the mountains of Afghanistan. Thankfully, our military tacticians actually learn from history. Was it a perfect plan? Hardly... war is not neat, clean or subject to set schedules.

    The fact that we have enjoyed six years without another successful attack on our soil indicates that you are ignoring the facts in your assertion that we are less safe today than we were on 9/11/01.

    Will there be other assaults, perhaps larger and more damaging than 9/11? Perhaps, but sitting on our thumbs, or insisting on artificial timeframes are not sensible options.

    Liberals argue this is not like WWII. I contend it is not at all like Vietnam. In fact, it is like no war we have ever fought. We need to quit trying to manage it as if it were Vietnam.

Top