Petraeus report

[solvs]

Kinda surprised there's no recent thread on this. I know we had the one awhile ago about what would be in it and whether or not anyone would believe it, or if it would change anything, but nothing new now that it's out and he's talking (when the mic works ;) that is). So, I'm assuming you've all been paying attention, what do you think?

For those who haven't read or listened to it, here's a link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/10/AR2007091001102.html).

[Swarmlord]

His summary of his report that he related on Fox last night during the slot normally occupied by Hannity and Colmes was one of the clearest and most succinct summaries I've heard in a long time. The guy exudes confidence and capability.

We're lucky we have that kind of talent at the top ranks of our military.

[Blue Velvet]

What some general says at home for primarily domestic audiences and a political class terrified of voter reprisal, comes as cold comfort (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6983841.stm) to those whose lives are broken (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6988828.stm).

This is going to take decades to play out.

[Swarmlord]

<snip>This is going to take decades to play out.

No major change like this is pleasant. The changes that resulted in the governments we have in the U.S or in countries like France resulted in a lot of bloodshed and suffering, but for the descendants of these people, things look pretty good in hindsight.

[Queso]

No major change like this is pleasant. The changes that resulted in the governments we have in the U.S or in countries like France resulted in a lot of bloodshed and suffering, but for the descendants of these people, things look pretty good in hindsight.
Both those examples came from internal uprisings. Both were caused by the will of the people whose descendants now look back fondly on the events. Neither were imposed by outsiders.

For a better comparison, how about you ask the Tibetans how fondly they remember their glorious conversion to Communism?

[Black&Tan]

What I find disquieting about this report is the timing. I'm sure its no accident that the good General is speaking before the US Senate on the 6th anniversary of the terrorist attacks here in the US.

What should come as a surprise is that we are no closer to catching Bin Laden than we were 6 years ago. And no one is holding this administration accountable.

[miloblithe]

What I find disquieting about this report is the timing. I'm sure its no accident that the good General is speaking before the US Senate on the 6th anniversary of the terrorist attacks here in the US.

What should come as a surprise is that we are no closer to catching Bin Laden than we were 6 years ago. And no one is holding this administration accountable.


Also he's speaking at the end of the summer, before the fall when violence has historically peaked around Ramadan. Any claimed downward trends in violence are best to point out now before things heat up again.

I was struck by one of the charts he used that pointed out that we've made no progress in the last two years on getting the Iraqi military self-sufficient.

[leekohler]

No one in this administration has given us one reason to trust them. I call BS on the basis of what I've heard from people who are/were there. There's no reason to think Petraeus is telling the truth, given the crap that's been shoved down our throats so far.

[mactastic]

Interesting choice of venue for the supposedly non-partisan, straightshooting General to go visit after the report.

Of course the guy did write an op-ed mash note to Bush's strategy that convienently appeared shortly before the '04 elections.

But hey, he's non-partisan, right?

[imac/cheese]

No one in this administration has given us one reason to trust them. I call BS on the basis of what I've heard from people who are/were there. There's no reason to think Petraeus is telling the truth, given the crap that's been shoved down our throats so far.

Having been a military officer, I would like to think that a good reason to trust that he is telling us is the truth would be that he has the integrity and honor required for such a position. Unfortunately, I witnessed too many officers that didn't. :(

[mactastic]

Having been a military officer, I would like to think that a good reason to trust that he is telling us is the truth would be that he has the integrity and honor required for such a position. Unfortunately, I witnessed too many officers that didn't. :(
My understanding is that to rise through the ranks requires the skills of a politician. Unfortunately, devotion to the truth is not among the hallmark skills of most politicians. I would have to assume the same is true for the upper ranks of the military.

[leekohler]

Having been a military officer, I would like to think that a good reason to trust that he is telling us is the truth would be that he has the integrity and honor required for such a position. Unfortunately, I witnessed too many officers that didn't. :(

You're not alone. My friends and family in the military say the same thing. It's sad that Bush has now dragged the integrity of military officers through the mud.

[imac/cheese]

You're not alone. My friends and family in the military say the same thing. It's sad that Bush has now dragged the integrity of military officers through the mud.

It wasn't Bush who ruined the integrity and honor of military officers, it was the officers who lack integrity and honor. There were dishonest officers in the Clinton military just like there are some now and I would assume that there have been dishonest officers in every president's force. Having never met Gen Petraeus, I have no idea what his character is.

[Ugg]

We're lucky we have that kind of talent at the top ranks of our military.

Yeah, he sold his soul to the highest bidder, that is very, very reassuring. Too bad all the true talent has been kicked out and much of those who remain are merely partisan tools.

[yellow]

There was something on NPR about the military's narrow interpretation of various events and how they scaled statistically into "sectarian violence".
Did anyone catch that?

[Swarmlord]

Yeah, he sold his soul to the highest bidder, that is very, very reassuring. Too bad all the true talent has been kicked out and much of those who remain are merely partisan tools.

Oh bollacks. Guys that reach four star rank don't get there during the term of a single administration. There's a certain amount of politics that goes with ANY high level job whether in the military or civilian world. It's always been that way and always will be, but that doesn't by definition mean that everyone left standing at the top is a tool.

I'm sure our servicemen and woman are thrilled to find out from you that there is no talent in their ranks.

[mactastic]

There was something on NPR about the military's narrow interpretation of various events and how they scaled statistically into "sectarian violence".
Did anyone catch that?
Yes. Apparently it has quite a bit to do with which side of the head the bullet enters from.

[yellow]

Yes. Apparently it has quite a bit to do with which side of the head the bullet enters from.

LOL. They certainly painted it that way.

[SMM]

I expected the General to do a good job, and he did. He is a very bright man, who would have succeeded just about anywhere in life. As an active duty soldier, he is sworn to defend the Country and support its' Commander-In-Chief. I may be wrong, but I get the feeling that the General would not be drawn into collusion. The disease is within the WH. This was Cheney's last ace to play (with exceptions). If the General does not capture enough support (and I do not think he can), their next moves may become ugly.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Bush's plan sucks, I like Bidens plan break it up into 3 with a loose federal govt spreading the wealth.

[solvs]

but that doesn't by definition mean that everyone left standing at the top is a tool.
By definition? No. In this administration? Yes. Are you forgetting how many of them have left or were kicked out who are now very critical of Bush and the war. The ones left either say nothing or parrot the administration. Which is what Petraeus is doing. We're disappointed because we were hoping for something more, but have been hearing for awhile now that he'll just be giving us the same talking points, which is exactly what he wound up doing. It's the same old spiel, and we're sick of it. We're sick of Iraq. We aren't winning, more time and more deaths isn't going to change that. No matter how much they cherry pick the data to make us think it will. And they did cherry pick the data, don't be fooled into thinking it was at all accurate. Get your news from almost anywhere but Fox, and you'd see that.

Maybe you want to keep waiting, keep letting people die, keep telling yourself we can win this, but the fact is we aren't winning. We aren't even getting ahead. Violence is actually up. There is no viable political solution. Things are only getting worse, and will continue to do so. And at this point, nothing is going to change that, no matter what someone who turns out to be a political crony says.

[mactastic]

From an exchange between Sen. Warner and Gen. Betrayus:
Sen. John Warner (R-Va.): "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 here as a strategy, do you feel that that is making America safer?"

Petraeus: "Sir, I believe that this is indeed the best course of action to achieve our objectives 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 Multi-National Force-Iraq."

[imac/cheese]

From an exchange between Sen. Warner and Gen. Betrayus:

How is he "Betrayus" if he is telling us that he believes something is the best course of action but he doesn't really know if it will make america safer. It seems he is being open and honest and not trying to use the WH's lines about making america safer.

[it5five]

I can't find the link now, but did anyone catch Jon Stewart's reaction to the Patraeus report? It's a sad state of affairs when a comedy news show is only one willing to look past the ******** and call people out when they need to be called out.

Jon Stewart commentary (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/09/12/jon-stewart-tears-apart-petraeus-dog-and-pony-show/)

EDIT: While looking for the video, I found this interesting article in which Adm. Fallon says Patraeus is a "kiss-ass little chicken ****".

Oh, and aparently Patraeus and Crocker gave an exclusive hour-long interview to Fox after the first day of testimony. How bi-partisan of them. :rolleyes:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/12/webb-fallon/

I can't believe people fall for this ******** facade the media built up for Patraeus.

[it5five]

How is he "Betrayus" if he is telling us that he believes something is the best course of action but he doesn't really know if it will make america safer. It seems he is being open and honest and not trying to use the WH's lines about making america safer.

He is "Betrayus" because he gets his orders from the White House. In his report he used almost the same exact phrases that Bush used in the past, word-for word. He isn't being honest and he isn't being open. He is a political hack appointed to his position because Bush needed someone loyal to toe the company line.

[SMM]

As I was turning this over in my mind, it occurred to me that Bush is close (if not beyond) turning foriegn policy decisions to the military. If we continue on the course, we are going to end up with a 'greased pig' contest - lots of finger pointing, no one taking responsibility and eventually some low-grade flunky getting all the blame.

The key is to squeeze the republicans who want to maintain their jobs. They cannot have it both ways; publically criticizing the war, but not helping to end it. We need to get these people to cross the isle.

[imac/cheese]

He is "Betrayus" because he gets his orders from the White House. In his report he used almost the same exact phrases that Bush used in the past, word-for word. He isn't being honest and he isn't being open. He is a political hack appointed to his position because Bush needed someone loyal to toe the company line.

That may be true, but the exerpt that mactastic posted didn't show that side of things in the least.

[imac/cheese]

The key is to squeeze the republicans who want to maintain their jobs. They cannot have it both ways; publically criticizing the war, but not helping to end it. We need to get these people to cross the isle.

I think the key is for the democrates to actually get some spine and stand up for what they believe in. It would make it a lot easier for the dems to have the republicians cross the isle and then when things go badly in or after the withdrawl (which is pretty much guaranteed to happen) the dems will not have to shoulder the blame alone. The GOP has already taken the blame for the war, they will probably not be willing to take the balme for the withdrawl too.

[SMM]

I think the key is for the democrates to actually get some spine and stand up for what they believe in. It would make it a lot easier for the dems to have the republicians cross the isle and then when things go badly in or after the withdrawl (which is pretty much guaranteed to happen) the dems will not have to shoulder the blame alone. The GOP has already taken the blame for the war, they will probably not be willing to take the balme for the withdrawl too.

They tried to pass a bill which set a deadline for funding the war. They did not have the votes to override Bush's veto, because none of the republicans would support it with the mandatory withdrawl. Now they are attempting to pass a new bill which would reduce our troop levels, change our role to security/advisors and require much more stringent reporting and review.

You seem to be missing a couple important points. Bush/Cheney do not want, nor will the sign any bill which places any accountability requirements, or limitations on them. To override the Bush veto, the House needs a 2/3's vote. The democrats do not have that large a majority. So, unless republicans side with them, they cannot pass the bill.

It may seem like they have no spine, because that is all the right-wing can sputter right now. A little more study on your part might go a long way to understand what is actually going on right now. Are you against the war? If so, how many letters/emails have you sent to your congressional delegation, encouraging them to work in a bipartisan way to end this mess?

[imac/cheese]

I am aware of the dems previous attempts to get something done. I am also aware of Bush's threats to veto any bill that limits the war. But even with the threat, their plans have not been good or well thought out. In my opinion, they are simply trying to make it look like they are pushing to withdrawl while letting the GOP hang themselves in the war. Even Carl Levin said of their first plan:

“I cannot vote ... to stop funding for our troops who are in harm’s way,” said Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “I simply cannot and I will not do that. It is not the proper way that we can bring this war to an end.”

The real situation is that there is not a good solution to anything right now. I am against the war and in general I am against all war, but I am also against having the military pull out and leave a void in Iraq. I do not think that would be the best way to solve the mess we have already made. I also know that us being there is not really solving anything either.

[mactastic]

That may be true, but the exerpt that mactastic posted didn't show that side of things in the least.
Must I provide background for everything? I'm guessing most everyone knows why I feel the Good General has betrayed his oath and his nation.

And to hear that his boss thinks he's an "ass-kissing little ***********"? That just confirms my suspiscions. Petraeus rose through the ranks by "cultivating senior officers". George W. Bush is just one more turd blossem Petereus is cultivating.

The real situation is that there is not a good solution to anything right now. I am against the war and in general I am against all war, but I am also against having the military pull out and leave a void in Iraq. I do not think that would be the best way to solve the mess we have already made. I also know that us being there is not really solving anything either.
You can't just stand there vascillating while Americans and Iraqis are killed every day. You gotta **** or get off the pot.

[imac/cheese]

Must I provide background for everything? I'm guessing most everyone knows why I feel the Good General has betrayed his oath and his nation.

I was simply pointing out that your post made him look better than you were trying to make him look. To me when someone says, I don't know, it is normally an honest answer.

You can't just stand there vascillating while Americans and Iraqis are killed every day. You gotta **** or get off the pot.

I am not sure if you mean me or our government. I can vascillate all day long and it won't make any difference to the war in Iraq. Our military is doing something, they are fighting the war. Our congress is not really doing anything that is helping the fight or working towards withdrawl.

SMM, you are right. The dems need to find a way to get the republicans to cross the isle. I haven't seen any ideas coming from them yet that will convince the republicans to make a move, but hopefully they will come up with a plan that is good enough to be bipartisan. I don't have a good solution to this mess and I am not sure that anybody else does either.

[mactastic]

I was simply pointing out that your post made him look better than you were trying to make him look. To me when someone says, I don't know, it is normally an honest answer.
Yeah, that's the honest answer. The betrayal is that he needs to say "IDK" to Bush, not to Congress. Were he not the sycophant I believe him to be, he would make his views known. Of course then we'd simply have a different general, one willing to toe the line.

I am not sure if you mean me or our government. I can vascillate all day long and it won't make any difference to the war in Iraq. Our military is doing something, they are fighting the war. Our congress is not really doing anything that is helping the fight or working towards withdrawl.
That's the problem. Congress is vascillating just like you are. And while they dither, US troops die and the US treasury is depleted.

We no longer have the luxury of Tevye-esque "on the one hand" introspection. We, as a nation, need to **** or get off the pot. Poll after poll seems to indicate that the American public prefers "get off the pot". Why Congress is so out of step with the public is a mystery to me.

SMM, you are right. The dems need to find a way to get the republicans to cross the isle. I haven't seen any ideas coming from them yet that will convince the republicans to make a move, but hopefully they will come up with a plan that is good enough to be bipartisan. I don't have a good solution to this mess and I am not sure that anybody else does either.
There are no good solutions. Bush was warned of this back in '03, but took no heed. There are only least-bad solutions. We've already boosted Iran's prestige and power, no do-overs on that one. We've already let loose the civil war Saddam kept in check through ruthless opression. We've already given a generation of future Islamic terrorists hands-on training that will surely result in future horrors in 20 years time. The only reductions in sectarian killings we've seen have been in regions that have been purged of Sunnis. I'll say it again -- there are NO good solutions. No solution that will allow America to leave the region with our head held high. No solution that doesn't benefit our enemies at least as much as it does us.

Until those supporting the President's policies get that concept through their heads, we're stuck. Unless the Democrats grow a spine. And I'm sure not counting on that.

[imac/cheese]

That's the problem. Congress is vascillating just like you are. And while they dither, US troops die and the US treasury is depleted.

The difference is that it is congress's job to tackle these issues while I am an engineer that takes a mild interest in trying to determine what I think would be the best solution. (By mild I mean way more than most people but nearly as much as others) The other difference is that no matter what decision I come up with, no one is going to act on my decision. Congress actually has the power to do something.

We no longer have the luxury of Tevye-esque "on the one hand" introspection. We, as a nation, need to **** or get off the pot. Poll after poll seems to indicate that the American public prefers "get off the pot". Why Congress is so out of step with the public is a mystery to me.

There are no good solutions. Bush was warned of this back in '03, but took no heed. There are only least-bad solutions. We've already boosted Iran's prestige and power, no do-overs on that one. We've already let loose the civil war Saddam kept in check through ruthless opression. We've already given a generation of future Islamic terrorists hands-on training that will surely result in future horrors in 20 years time. The only reductions in sectarian killings we've seen have been in regions that have been purged of Sunnis. I'll say it again -- there are NO good solutions. No solution that will allow America to leave the region with our head held high. No solution that doesn't benefit our enemies at least as much as it does us.

Until those supporting the President's policies get that concept through their heads, we're stuck. Unless the Democrats grow a spine. And I'm sure not counting on that.

Excellent post.

[SMM]

The real situation is that there is not a good solution to anything right now. I am against the war and in general I am against all war, but I am also against having the military pull out and leave a void in Iraq. I do not think that would be the best way to solve the mess we have already made. I also know that us being there is not really solving anything either.



cheese - this is what kept us in vietnam far longer than neccessary (assuming you believe it was neccessary at some point). President Kennedy was going to pull-out of Vietnam right after the 1964 election. This is not speculation. it is on the record, in video. He said"...afterall this is their fight and they have to be the ones to win, or lose it". before we actually left, more than 45,000 additional American soldiers died, 250,000 more were seriously wounded. over a million Vietnamese died. For what?

We are now at the same place in this war. For me, it is deja vue. The past 4 years almost seem scripted. I commend you,a dn many others, for taking a humanitarian view for the innocents of Iraq. But, we cannot prevent the final outcome. This civilization is over 3000 years old. They have been through this so many times over the centuries, they know how to solve it far better than we do. We need to let them do it in their own way. Yes, we are guilty for having caused this mess. Hopefully we will get an opportunity to make amends. But, first we need to clear the area and let them solve this.

What we also need to do is make sure that the same group of idiots cannot launch an attack against Iran. I read last night, the WH has directed the Pentegon to put together an attack plan against Iran. I am looking at real estate in Costa Rica.

[it5five]

We are now at the same place in this war. For me, it is deja vue. The past 4 years almost seem scripted.

I'm taking a class on the Vietnam war right now and every day I read through my books, it seems like someone was writing about both the Vietnam war and Iraq. Almost everything is the same about the two wars. When Bush had first denied that, he showed he knows absolutely nothing about history, and now that he makes comparisons between to two, saying we shouldn't have left Vietnam so soon, shows me that Bush knows nothing about history and he places no value on human life.

[mactastic]

Funniest part of that whole bit is that Shrubya thinks we should have stayed in Vietnam longer -- as long as he didn't have to be one of the people "staying" there for any length of time.

[SMM]

I'm taking a class on the Vietnam war right now and every day I read through my books, it seems like someone was writing about both the Vietnam war and Iraq. Almost everything is the same about the two wars. When Bush had first denied that, he showed he knows absolutely nothing about history, and now that he makes comparisons between to two, saying we shouldn't have left Vietnam so soon, shows me that Bush knows nothing about history and he places no value on human life.

it5five - the bastards knew this was going to be the plan all along. but, there was no way they could let anyone even sniff the word 'Vietnam'. There were a lot of us who could see the correlation immediately. But, our voices were drowned out by those fanning the flames for war.

[solvs]

Leave General Petraeus Alone (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiuRhy4CqzU&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecrooksandliars%2Ecom%2F) :D

[pcorajr]

My understanding is that to rise through the ranks requires the skills of a politician. Unfortunately, devotion to the truth is not among the hallmark skills of most politicians. I would have to assume the same is true for the upper ranks of the military.


Next time be more specific. not all ranks requires politicians skills and i as hell do not want to get compared to no politically inclined military officer.

Your opinion would be valid if you where talking about a Officer that did not have the service and distinction Petraeus has earned, His service record shows that he is one of the few out there that are not politically inclined. I believe he is Honest about what he said.

[pcorajr]

He is "Betrayus" because he gets his orders from the White House. In his report he used almost the same exact phrases that Bush used in the past, word-for word. He isn't being honest and he isn't being open. He is a political hack appointed to his position because Bush needed someone loyal to toe the company line.

So am I and my fellow marines Betrayus to? Are you kiding me? I do to receive orders from my commander in cheif and execute them, does that makes me and my unit a gang of betrayus?

My Sargent Mayor Just got back from Iraq and we had lunch 3 days ago. He pretty much gave me a report of how things where now compared to the last time i was there (about 4 years) and he told me that he really thinks the last surge helped immensely.

To you that sounds like political BS. To me that sounds like we are doing a good job, it also means that my sacrifice done 4 years ago is not going to go in vain. Why do you feel you must all any good news out of Iraq BS. Do you know how bad it frustrates us in the front lines when you *******s in the states tell us how to do our job or tell us that what we are doing is wrong?

We are already in Iraq for what ever reason be it political, for money what ever you want to believe. You have the right to think what ever you want to think about Bush and his administration. But Do remember to exclude the military.

We were sent there to do a job, do not tell us how do this cause that is not yours to decide.

[leekohler]

So am I and my fellow marines Betrayus to? Are you kiding me? I do to receive orders from my commander in cheif and execute them, does that makes me and my unit a gang of betrayus?

My Sargent Mayor Just got back from Iraq and we had lunch 3 days ago. He pretty much gave me a report of how things where now compared to the last time i was there (about 4 years) and he told me that he really thinks the last surge helped immensely.

To you that sounds like political BS. To me that sounds like we are doing a good job, it also means that my sacrifice done 4 years ago is not going to go in vain. Why do you feel you must all any good news out of Iraq BS. Do you know how bad it frustrates us in the front lines when you *******s in the states tell us how to do our job or tell us that what we are doing is wrong?

We are already in Iraq for what ever reason be it political, for money what ever you want to believe. You have the right to think what ever you want to think about Bush and his administration. But Do remember to exclude the military.

We were sent there to do a job, do not tell us how do this cause that is not yours to decide.



BTW- no one here blames people in the military for what's happening in Iraq. We blame Bush. We also know that high-ranking officials have either lied or were lied to by the administration to make it seem like things in Iraq were going great. There is a huge loss of trust when it comes to this administration. They have given us no reason to believe what they say- they've lied so much already.

[it5five]

BTW- no one here blames people in the military for what's happening in Iraq. We blame Bush. We also know that high-ranking officials have either lied or were lied to by the administration to make it seem like things in Iraq were going great. There is a huge loss of trust when it comes to this administration. They have given us no reason to believe what they say- they've lied so much already.

I partly blame the military. Maybe when they stop raping, murdering, and torturing innocent Iraqis for no reason, or doing (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12838343/) things (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/26/world/middleeast/26haditha.html?ei=5088&en=73b91e4388971ba0&ex=1306296000&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print) like (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200412/s1260377.htm) this (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002614590), then I'll stop blaming some of them. I know it isn't representative of the entire army, but surveys like this (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402151.html?hpid=topnews) really hurt the image of the entire army.

Less than half of marines and soldiers believed non-combatants (civilians) should be treated with dignity and respect. 1/3 believe torture is a-okay if it "gathers important information about insurgents".

Maybe if Republicans actually "supported" the troops and didn't vote against Webb's legislation that would give troops as much time home as they are deployed, they would be less stressed and less likely to do ****** things. The only people to vote against it were Republicans.

[it5five]

So am I and my fellow marines Betrayus to? Are you kiding me? I do to receive orders from my commander in cheif and execute them, does that makes me and my unit a gang of betrayus?

My Sargent Mayor Just got back from Iraq and we had lunch 3 days ago. He pretty much gave me a report of how things where now compared to the last time i was there (about 4 years) and he told me that he really thinks the last surge helped immensely.

To you that sounds like political BS. To me that sounds like we are doing a good job, it also means that my sacrifice done 4 years ago is not going to go in vain. Why do you feel you must all any good news out of Iraq BS. Do you know how bad it frustrates us in the front lines when you *******s in the states tell us how to do our job or tell us that what we are doing is wrong?

We are already in Iraq for what ever reason be it political, for money what ever you want to believe. You have the right to think what ever you want to think about Bush and his administration. But Do remember to exclude the military.

We were sent there to do a job, do not tell us how do this cause that is not yours to decide.

And that is the problem I have with the military in general. It produces killing machines unable to voice dissent or think for themselves. If someone told me to do something, and I disagreed with it, you can be damn sure I wouldn't be doing it. But I suppose that is entirely the reason the military went all volunteer. If that's something you're okay with, then you're free to do what you want.

I have every right to think what I want about the military, just as I have every right to think what I want about Bush and his administration.

EDIT: Before anyone criticizes me for not "supporting the troops", let me clarify my position. I feel bad for the people that joined the military because they had no other options. Maybe they joined for the free college education afterward; whatever. But I don't see why I should feel for people that decided to make a career out of killing other human beings. I'd love to see free or affordable college education here in the States like Europe has, so some people won't feel pressured to join the military for money to go to school.

[skunk]

So am I and my fellow marines Betrayus to? Are you kiding me? I do to receive orders from my commander in cheif and execute them, does that makes me and my unit a gang of betrayus?"I was only carrying out orders". Where have I heard that before?
We were sent there to do a job, do not tell us how do this cause that is not yours to decide.It was an illegal job. Half a million have died. You derive any authority you may think you have to break the law, wreck people's homes and lives, kill suspects without trial and trample on a sovereign people solely from your questionable status as an armed representative of the US, so it is very much for your countrymen to decide.

[it5five]

"I was only carrying out orders". Where have I heard that before?
It was an illegal job. Half a million have died. You derive any authority you may think you have to break the law, wreck people's homes and lives, kill suspects without trial and trample on a sovereign people solely from your questionable status as an armed representative of the US, so it is very much for your countrymen to decide.

Glad to see I'm not the only one that feels this way.

[Lyle]

I partly blame the military. Maybe when they stop raping, murdering, and torturing innocent Iraqis for no reason, or doing (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12838343/) things (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/26/world/middleeast/26haditha.html?ei=5088&en=73b91e4388971ba0&ex=1306296000&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print) like (;http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200412/s1260377.htm") this (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002614590), then I'll stop blaming some of them... I don't see why I should feel for people that decided to make a career out of killing other human beings.I can only hope that the Democratic nominee for President (whoever he or she may be) has the courage to stand up and say what you've said about the military.

[mactastic]

Next time be more specific. not all ranks requires politicians skills and i as hell do not want to get compared to no politically inclined military officer.
Did I compare you to anything? I didn't think so.

Your opinion would be valid if you where talking about a Officer that did not have the service and distinction Petraeus has earned, His service record shows that he is one of the few out there that are not politically inclined. I believe he is Honest about what he said.
I believe his boss, who said Petraus is "an ass-kissing little ***********". What record to you speak of? Perhaps his record of writing ass-kissing op-eds just prior to election time?

[skunk]

I can only hope that the Democratic nominee for President (whoever he or she may be) has the courage to stand up and say what you've said about the military.Of course they can't, but the sad fact of the matter is that the US army is presently being used in much the same way as those private contractors we hear so much about.

[Iscariot]

Petraeus' report and testimony doesn't differ much from the same rhetoric we've been hearing on a near daily basis. As much as I would like to see the coalition's efforts come to a meaningful fruition, Petreaus' words ring hollow when the evidence we see coming from Iraq paints a different picture. I realize that much of what we see is coming in through the filter of a media given to hysteria and sensationalism, but if their position was without merit there would be a greater abundance of evidence that directly contradicts it.

What we hear are words, and we are asked to take them at face value based on the honour or authority of the person we hear them from, and I don't think that passes muster in the face of what we see.

[solvs]

His service record shows that he is one of the few out there that are not politically inclined.
You mean like the article he wrote in '04 right before the elections, or how "his" report was actually written by the WH?

So am I and my fellow marines Betrayus to? Are you kiding me? I do to receive orders from my commander in cheif and execute them, does that makes me and my unit a gang of betrayus?
I see where you're going with this. Petraeus does not equal the military. Nor does Bush. There are plenty of military folks, both retired and not, criticizing the war too, who have themselves been criticized by the GOP. Some of them members of Moveon. This goes both ways here. If they can be criticized, so can he.

My Sargent Mayor Just got back from Iraq and we had lunch 3 days ago. He pretty much gave me a report of how things where now compared to the last time i was there (about 4 years) and he told me that he really thinks the last surge helped immensely.
He would be in the minority. Some of us have friends and family in the military as well, and most of them paint a different picture. As do the numbers. If you really look at the reality, things aren't improving.

Why do you feel you must all any good news out of Iraq BS.
Because what little there is that's good is vastly overshadowed by all that is not.

Do you know how bad it frustrates us in the front lines when you *******s in the states tell us how to do our job or tell us that what we are doing is wrong?
We aren't criticizing you. We're criticizing those who have screwed this up so much that we are still there so many years later as no discernible improvements have been made. Be they the politicians (many of whom have never served themselves) or the few soldiers who give the others a bad name. Or Blackwater, who have also just made things worse.

As I said, some of us have loved ones over there. We have a stake in this too. We're frustrated, and according to recent polls, a majority of the military agree with us. They get voices too you know.

We were sent there to do a job, do not tell us how do this cause that is not yours to decide.
I'm an American, and a tax payer, and there are people I care about who have been there and may have to go back. The reasons we are there are highly suspect. The execution has been an utter failure. The real terrorists that threaten us are still out there in a completely different area that we are loosing because we pulled resources to go to Iraq. And our elected officials, who work for us, are failing not just us, but you guys as well. With the lack of body armor, other equipment, rest time, proper medical care once you get back, and a list of other things, you'd think you'd be madder at those who put you there for unclear reasons, only to keep you there due to poor planning, and worse to not care for you while there or once you return. If you return.

It damn well is our right to say what we think about this, just as it is yours to do so, and since all we're doing is giving our (mostly informed) opinions, I don't see what your problem is with that.

[solvs]

it also means that my sacrifice done 4 years ago is not going to go in vain.

For the record, that wasn't an attack on you. We appreciate your sacrifices, and welcome you to comment here. But if we disagree, we will dispute you. If you stick around, you may see why we feel the way we do. And no offense, but you don't speak for all of the soldiers.

E-mails sent to Moveon after the ad:

I'm currently in Iraq. I do not agree with this war, and if I did support this war, it would not matter. You have the RIGHT to speak the truth. We KNOW that you support us. Thank you for speaking out for being our voice. We do not have a voice. We are overshooted by those who say that we soldiers do not support organizations like MoveOn. WE DO.

YOU ARE OUR voice.


I have given a son to this country. My brother, my father, my uncle have all served honorably and bravely. I am a loyal American. I am outraged and sick to death of the tactics this administration uses to try to silence dissent to a war that is unjust, built and maintained on lies, political power, and greed. I was content to let others fight more loudly, but no more.
–Sharyn W., NC

I am a prior soldier who served in Iraq for 13 months, and am now an expecting mom with a husband who is deployed in Baghdad. I don't think I can ever forgive the Bush administration for the lies that tricked America into this war and hurt my family so badly. I am ashamed of those American politicians who would condemn an organization for practicing the Freedom of Speech that so many soldiers have died for.
–Danielle B., OH

As a US Navy veteran and an Iraq war veteran of over a year I want to ask, What has happened to us? What has happened to our voice? Where is this country going with stopping free speech and free press? ... Every time I think of the long nights I had in Anbar remembering what I was fighting for, well here it is....
–Ahmad H., LA

[mactastic]

Apparently Rush Limbaugh has called Chuck Hagel - a decorated combat veteran himself - Senator Betrayus. Which of course is an attack on the troops, but for some reason Bush and the GOP can only manage to get themselves worked up into a froth over the MoveOn name-calling.

IOKIYAR once again.

[Kashchei]

How dare any of you criticize Gen. Petreus! He is universally admired and respected. This veneer of respectability is to be maintained AT ALL COST. Otherwise people might begin to think about the validity of what he said and once that process begins, the results can only be bad for the Bushies.

BTW, I didn't read this but I heard about an article in The Guardian that mentioned that Petreus has presidential ambitions in 2012. This information was not released before his momentous hearings since everyone implicitly trusts a general, while no one trusts a politician. More proof that these people are brilliant at politics and lousy at governing.

[mactastic]

Ah yes, I remember the right-wing wurlitzer cranking at full volume telling us that we couldn't trust anything Hillary Clinton said because she had presidential ambitions.

But IOKIYAR to have presidential ambitions and still remain trustworthy.