Petraeus will Provide "Sense" of How It is Going in September

By Big Tent Democrat, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:21:15 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

As I mentioned yesterday, the idea that in September the report of General David Petraeus on the Surge will weaken Godot Republican resolve on following Bush's Iraq Debacle policy is simply unrealistic. Glenn Greenwald catches Gen. Petraeus interviewed by Hugh Hewitt of all people:

HH: Now you’re due to make a report back in September, I don’t know if it’s early, mid or late September, General Petraeus, is that enough time to really get a fix on how the surge is progressing? DP: Well, I have always said that we will have a sense by that time of basically, of how things are going, have we been able to achieve progress on the ground, where have their been shortfalls, and so forth. And I think that is a reasonable amount of time to have had all the forces on the ground, again, for about three months, to have that kind of sense. . . .

Does anyone believe that a proud soldier like Petraeus will provide a sense that he can't succeed? Of course he will not. Heck, if he would, would you really want him to be leading the forces? Unlike Glenn, I am not as skeptical of Petraeus' intentions; I just realize he is human and the commander of the operation is not going to be the one to declare his operation a failure. More.

Glenn gets this part right:

In general, military commanders do not typically pronounce their own strategies to have failed; quite the opposite. The need for skepticism here is particularly acute given that there are plenty of Generals with equally impressive military pedigrees who disagree vigorously with Petraeus. War supporters -- who are attempting now to make criticisms of Petraeus off-limits -- long disputed the claims and views of Generals Casey and Abaziad, often quite vigorously, even insultingly. The statements about war from military commanders ought to be subjected to every bit as much scrutiny and skepticism as anyone else's.

Exactly right. Glenn then prononce Petraeus as particularly "sunny" in his previous predictions. That well may be but I think the general points suffices.

One bonus point from Petraeus in response to a loaded question from Hewitt:

HH: Last question, General. How can the American public support these troops most effectively?
DP: Well, I think the American public has been doing that. I think actually, regardless of the views on Iraq, the American public has supported our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen and the civilians that are deployed over here. And I think that that is wonderful. We all saw, some of us, you know, as we were growing up, a situation where that was not the case. And happily in this case, as I said, regardless of one’s views, regardless on where one comes down on the issue of Iraq, there is backing for those great young men and women who are putting everything on the line here on a daily basis, in right now, 125 degree heat and body armor and Kevlar, against a barbaric enemy, in an exceedingly tough and complex situation. I think I mentioned to you before that when Tom Brokaw was out here with us one time, he said that surely this has to be the new greatest generation. And I very, very much agree with that. And as I mentioned earlier, I feel very privileged to be able to soldier with these great young men and women here in Iraq again.

Regardless of one's view on Iraq. Good for Petraeus on that point.

< Defense Begins in Jose Padilla Trial | Bill Rises to Hillary's Defense >

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.

Petraeus will Provide "Sense" of How It is Going in September | 57 comments (57 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Who needs to talk about Iraq (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by andgarden on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:24:01 AM EST

when you can traffic in rumors about David Vitter. . .?

Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:41:06 AM EST

Is that the latest obsession now?


Yup (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by andgarden on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:43:34 AM EST

This.


5 hookers in his "brothel" (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:46:21 AM EST

and one is pregnant?

Has Vitter come out in favor of forced abortion yet?


Excuse me, I wanted to spread that (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:47:59 AM EST

gossip but nooooooo, you beat me to the keyboard.


Yeah, well (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:50:30 AM EST

I woke so stiff and sore this morning that I've had about seventeen friggin' cups of coffee so far, my keyboard is in flames, and my teeth are exploding.

What to make something of it??? :-)


I better go talk to Pelosi about defunding Iraq... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:52:06 AM EST

Sore Joints (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:53:52 AM EST

I woke so stiff and sore this morning....

Why's that? Were you doing field work in NOLA yesterday, following up on Flynt's leads?


Nothing that meaningful and useful, no (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:56:33 AM EST

Just have more and more parts now that are older than the rest of me... sigh.


I kind like the insinuation though ;-) (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:57:34 AM EST

Want even creepier gossip? (5.00 / 1) (#29)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:08:48 AM EST

I'm searching for Petraeus' written works online and discover that in 1991 at Fort Campbell a soldier tripped and accidentally shot Petraeus' in the chest with an M-16. Rushed into emergency surgery who saved David Petraeus' life before he came along to make mine a sinkhole? Bill Frist! Whoever God is, I just want him to know that he is not funny!


Maybe (none / 0) (#32)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:28:12 AM EST

She has a warped sense of humor?

God:

"Here you go, humans. If you can deal with this you can overcome anything."
"Don't let me down."

Why is it that all the men in my life (5.00 / 1) (#51)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 05:06:52 PM EST

keep insisting that God is a woman?


: Buck passing (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 06:43:00 PM EST

: A colleague wrote me a (5.00 / 2) (#53)
by oculus on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 07:05:51 PM EST

"while you were out" message about a phone call from a friend giving me the name of a book: When God Is a Woman My colleague [male] added: men be in heap big trouble.

: Hoping for better I guess. (none / 0) (#55)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 08:23:19 PM EST

As George Carlin said (talking about the god the churches invented):
"...if there is a God, it has to be a man. No woman could or would ever fu*k things up like this."

Petraeus (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:44:06 AM EST

will Provide "Sense" of How It is Going in September???

You spelled "NONSENSE" wrong. ;-)

Good Will (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:46:30 AM EST

Of the American public is in contrast to the public sentiment during Vietnam it is only a matter of time before that turns.

In another five years we will be seeing the fallout on our streets and the anger for staying the course will fall on the weakest ones, the poor and unsupported troops with PTSD.

It is nice of you to pull out something positive from the flattering rhetoric of Patreus, but his rhetoric is serving one purpose only and that to stay the course.

there is backing for those great young men and women who are putting everything on the line here on a daily basis, in right now, 125 degree heat and body armor and Kevlar, against a barbaric enemy, in an exceedingly tough and complex situation.

Yes the backing is to bring these men and women home and then they won't have to face the bararism that arises from a people fighting off an occupier who is jailing and torturing their brothers and sisters.

Off topic - new executive order (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by joanneleon on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:00:50 AM EST

BTD, will you be posting anything on the new executive order that was issued a couple days ago?

Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq

: I am reviewing it right now (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:41:40 AM EST

: What the spooky heck is that about? (none / 0) (#18)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:27:08 AM EST

We will all be Padilla soon.

wow (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Yando on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:08:54 AM EST

Cool, a "sense."
I knew this trillion dollars would pay for
something.
We got a "sense."

Petraeus May Report Early (1.00 / 1) (#25)
by talex on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:56:18 AM EST

Well you know I really hate to break up the party of people talking for doom and gloom come September. I understand though. Months and months have been invested is saying unrealistic, it will never happen, etc etc. So for some it is better that it don't - FOR THEM - - - but not necessarily for our soldiers.

Jack Reed recently visited Iraq and spoke to Petraeus among others. Remember Reed is an old West Pointer himself and served in the military. So he has an affinity with Petraeus in that regard. He is what Reed had to say upon his return.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said his impression from a conversation with General David Petraeus was that the leader of U.S. troops in Iraq "seemed very eager to come forward as quickly as possible with a new direction and policy."
Reed, the co-sponsor of legislation that would require President Bush to withdraw combat troops from Iraq by April of next year, recently made his tenth trip to Iraq and spoke with Petraeus, who is slated to report to Congress in September on the progress of the war.
The senator said, in an interview with C-SPAN's "Newsmakers" show that is expected to air Sunday, that he was surprised that Petraeus went out of his way to say that he might have something to say in August and not wait until September.

Read the rest here

Also last week on the Charlie Rose Show Reed gave the reasons Petraeus may report early:

Petraeus may have assembled enough information and enough analysis before the 9-15 reporting deadline
Petraeus understands that come next April it will become very difficult to maintain the current force structure in Iraq
Petraeus is also considering the need for troops worldwide which is being hampered by Iraq
Petraeus realizes the political pressure from the American public

Link To Reed Segment

From listening to Reed on the Charlie Rose Show he felt pretty certain the report would come early although he did not know if it would come two weeks early or a month early. He said it was up to Petraeus when he has all the info he needed - but ASAP in any case.

<<<>>>

Of note on the Levin Reed vote is that ALL the Dems voted in unison which is a good sign. We also got more Repub votes that any previous bills yielded.

So last night I took a quick look at the numbers after the Senate vote of 52-47. 52 leaves us (well those of us who are working toward September) 8 to go for 60 which would force a Bush veto. 15 to go for a VPM.

Well if you add Reid's 'no' vote and Johnson's did not vote we would be at 54-46 with only 6 to go for 60.

Now if we could come up with a bipartisan bill and pull in for starters Voinovich, Warner, Lugar, and Coleman (who has voted with us before) then we are at 58 with only two to go.

Now the remaining Repubs who have broken with Bush back the ISG bill. They are:

Sen Domenici
Sen Alexander, Lamar
Sen Bennett, Robert F.
Sen Gregg, Judd
Sen Sununu, John

All we need in addition to the fore mentioned are 2 out of the 5 to get to 60. All of this is doable.

Now once we are at 60 lets say we could get all 5 of the ISG guys above. That would put us at 63 with only 4 to go for 67.

There are certainly more than 4 more who are going to break with Bush. If we can get all of the above to vote on a bipartisan bill the the additional 4+ will come along for the ride and we will be at 67+.

So I have my list of who I am calling/faxing today and all through August.

The numbers are there in the people who have already broke with Bush. It's just a matter of pulling them more to our side as I have been saying here and at dkos. Once we have then the other 4+ will be there.

As for the House - Lamar Alexander mentioned on Face The Nation that there are 50 moderates evenly split that are now supporting the ISG. So that is 25 Repubs. We need 59. If we can get the 25 to come our way in, again, a bipartisan bill then another 34 out of a remaining universe if 176 Repubs is not hard to imagine happening especially with 25 of their own signing on and the Senate being at 67 already.

I have said all along that this is a process of slow steady work and along with ever growing public distaste for Iraq it will all work in our favor. Here we are in July, not September, and there is already light at the end of the tunnel.

Now given that Petraeus may report early and that he is very aware of:

that come next April it will become very difficult to maintain the current force structure in Iraq
the need for troops worldwide which is being hampered by Iraq
the political pressure from the American public

then things could go very well in September.

I and others are very hopeful that things will go well on the VPM front. And we have been working to make calls and donate money for targeted ads that have been and will be aired throughout the rest of the summer. We want this to work. We believe it can work. And there are early signs it is working.

We also know there are some who do not want it to work. To those we say you are always welcome to join the military in Iraq who also hopes it works.


It's true (5.00 / 1) (#43)
by Alien Abductee on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 03:08:12 PM EST

that if we had some eggs we could have eggs and ham, if we had some ham. I mean, I wouldn't say there isn't ham to be had...


While (none / 0) (#31)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:25:24 AM EST

I strongly disagree with your analysis and find you sdtray over the line a bit in this comment, I repeat to you, if you could just keep it at this level of argumentation we would have no beef with your participation here.

In any event, you have 3 comments left today.


Listen Name Caller (1.00 / 1) (#36)
by talex on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:30:25 PM EST

You have no beef with others following your lead calling me names like liar and such. In fact you encourage them to do so as I have well documented by screen shots of your posts doing so. So don't lecture me when you condone double standards.

I rather doubt the Jeralyn would approve of your antics. You are the only front pager here who conducts themselves as you do. The others are civil and don't stifle opposing opinions. I shutter to think what Jeralyn's colleagues think when they happen by to check our 'her' blog and see how you conduct yourself - name calling, threats, and childish taunting. Know what I mean? Is that how you want to represent her blog?

Is that how she wants you to represent her blog?

Because if you keep it up someday I am going to take her up on her offer to send her samples of how you represent her to her aol address.

As for how I opened my post it reflected what I read in the thread. And it reflected what has been said here for a long time now, as I said.

And your response just confirms it. Of course you disagree with my analysis. It is contrary to what you want to believe - but not contrary to the growing facts - and numbers don't lie.

You continue to support something that is not even talked about in DC. I support something that is not only supported in DC but is supported by huge established organizations:

SEIU
MoveOn.org Political Action
Center for American Progress Action Fund
USAction
Win Without War
Vote Vets
Campaign for America's Future
USSA
Working Assets
Americans United for Change
Campus Progress Action

Their analysis is the same as mine or they would not continue to put forth the resources that they are to continue on our path. Does that make any sense to you?

Gotta go now. But before I do let me just say that I laugh loudly at your child like ways when you say three times a day - "you have x comments left today". Is that your idea of 'power'?

Truly, this coming from a grown man???!!!

Keep it up. If you only knew who what mature people think of you when they read that. Pathetic comes to mind.


2 comments left for today (5.00 / 1) (#37)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:05:15 PM EST

Ahem (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by andgarden on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:32:50 PM EST

I shutter to think

It's "shudder to think." You seem stupid when you get it wrong.


Ahem. (5.00 / 1) (#42)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:48:32 PM EST

When he gets it wrong?


Well Damned (1.00 / 1) (#45)
by talex on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 03:46:03 PM EST

andgarden you found your calling!

If correcting spelling errors and typos is your thing then I guess Armando will keep you real busy!!! Daily!!

Hey Armando!


: 1 comment left (5.00 / 2) (#46)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 04:01:34 PM EST

Pure trolling. (none / 0) (#47)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 04:06:39 PM EST

Too bad whoever sent you couldn't find a more capable troll, talex. Go back and tell them you're not up to the task and that they need to send someone competent.


I Dunno Edger (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 04:11:30 PM EST

Seems liks quite the troll to me. S/he sure seems to wind you up.


Well... yes, (none / 0) (#56)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 08:48:15 PM EST

You do make a good point, Squeaky. I'll work on it.


No Work Involved (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:43:59 PM EST

Just like defunding. Do nothing. Although I guess it is easier said than done.


: Hahahahaha... Touche! Thanks. :-) (none / 0) (#58)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:46:03 PM EST

Agree all the way around with (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:16:50 AM EST

what you say. He will trot out Al Anbar province and he will talk about how we have been able to work with the civilian population there to end the violence. He will probably avoid talking in great detail about how we left Al Anbar to SURGE in Baghdad though and because we were no longer an active aggressor in the region it placed us in a position to be able to help the people of Al Anbar instead of just kill more collateral damage in Al Anbar. That would make almost every single thing President "W" has ever said look SO STUPID, and for better or worse "W" is Petraeus' CIC.

I still haven't read his theories of what the French did wrong in Vietnam and I am going to do that today because I have run out of excuses for not doing it. I'm sure it will help me understand more of where he is likely going to take us on this theme park ride that should be condemned because it doesn't meet code.

He's a hell of a bureaucrat though for a soldier. It has earned him a lot of distrust in the military because soldiers don't seem to like anybody who smells perfumed. He could be the one person who saves more than a few Iraqi and Coalition lives if he should choose to do so because he does know how to lipstick a pig that even "W" could love. Will he do that though since we can't unseat this stupid "W"? I don't know. And who will probably finally be the one to unseat "W" since we can't live with him, we can't impeach him and we can't shoot him? Probably Larry Flynt

: What I've read so far (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:52:09 AM EST

from Petraeus, very well written and a great read on paper. Not promising from the point where we are in this mess. Everything he has written reads successful counterinsurgency equals stern committment, lots of committed troops, lots of committed time. He understands and is very clear about the manpower, money power, time needed to conduct a counterinsurgency success. Did anybody read any of this before they excitedly unanimously confirmed him? How badly is he determined to make Iraq a success? Is he going to trot out our Al Anbar success and then call for a draft? He knows his current manpower is Kaput in April.

I do not know the rules on this E (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:40:20 AM EST

This is kosher?

Heh! I hope so. (none / 0) (#21)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:43:51 AM EST

You're in charge. :-)

I know what I said. I don't need to read it any more. ;-)


In an abundance of caution (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:56:17 AM EST

I'm going to take it down.

No hard feelings I hope.


I might post it as a diary at dKos though. (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:09:39 AM EST

What do you think, Armando?


Done. (none / 0) (#34)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:05:21 PM EST

The enhanced version is here. :-)


F' Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:21:08 PM EST

My favorite comment:

don't hold back. Say it like you mean it

: Heh. (none / 0) (#40)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:26:40 PM EST

They seem to like it at Kos.

No problem. ;-) (none / 0) (#26)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:02:21 AM EST

No hard feelings!


Except (none / 0) (#27)
by Edger on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:03:57 AM EST

towards people who keep coming up with excuses for not ending the debacle.


: Oh Well (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:08:13 AM EST

I tried Edger..... effin' 'ell.

Homonyms and Misspellings are OK (none / 0) (#23)
by squeaky on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:55:27 AM EST

If the only point is that they do not trip off corporate law site's et al censors.

That is depending on how delicate the "ears" and "eyes" of those machines are. Artificial intelligence is not always that smart.


"Does anyone believe... (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by desertswine on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:15:10 PM EST

...that a proud soldier like Petraeus will provide a sense that he can't succeed?"

I predict that Petraeus will report that a sense of "progress" is being made."

: of course ... (none / 0) (#44)
by Sailor on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 03:35:50 PM EST

... Petraeus will betray us, but that may just be a gut feeling.

: Profound progress (none / 0) (#49)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 04:57:47 PM EST

in certain areas. Some that weren't even expected. It sounds terrific already.

Hard to see how he can report any progress (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by oculus on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:18:56 PM EST

on the benchmarks for the Iraq Legislature though. Today's paper tells us Al Sadr's deputies plus the president of the Legislature are returning after a month of protest by not attending. Another large group did the same thing. In August, all will be on vacation.

: I have spent the day reading his stuff (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 05:02:04 PM EST

He will point to successes with the populations like Al Anbar, he will point out in his final draft not yet implemented Counterinsurgency Manual where this falls in place and that is in the early stages of your SUCCESS staging your counterinsurgency and he will point out that workable government that is dependable and reliable is about 12 to 16 months out, maybe more.......according to the successful counterinsurgency manual. So saddle up boys cuz this is going to be a long ride.

et al (1.00 / 1) (#54)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 08:13:16 PM EST

I just realize he is human and the commander of the operation is not going to be the one to declare his operation a failure

Nice to see Big Tent set up the smoke screen that Petraeous can't be believed.

Even nicer, it isn't because he would lie, BTD knows that would hard to prove and push, but because he is "human."

Watch for BTD to quote himself in the future.

The Military is under civlian control (none / 0) (#2)
by lilybart on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:29:46 AM EST

for better or worse, so no matter what Patreus says, he is not the "decider."

Of course the decider has already decided that we are staying in Iraq until he leaves office.

So none of this matters.

Sometimes general know - the war is lost (none / 0) (#22)
by koshembos on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:54:11 AM EST

I would disagree with the assumption that ... that a proud soldier like Petraeus will [not] provide a sense that he can't succeed... Trurely, most generals believe in success no matter what. A few of them are wise and realistic and know that the war is lost.