The turning point in the debate over Iraq will almost certainly turn out to have occurred during General Petraeus’ congressional testimony when he was asked if the war in Iraq has made America safer. His answer was a very bitter pill for Republican Senators to swallow.
During the hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee yesterday, Senator John Warner, Republican from Virginia, asked General Petraeus if the war in Iraq was making America safer. General Petraeus shocked Republicans when he responded, "Sir, I don't know, actually. I haven't sat down and sorted it out in my own mind."
This clearly unscripted and unwelcome comment disturbed Republican lawmakers, who probably should have floated the question by the General in private, before asking it in public.
It was not just that President Bush and Republicans have been saying, “we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here”, or that the entire stated purpose of the so-called war on terror was to make America safer, but rather the most shocking aspect was that General Petraeus admitted that the question had never even crossed his mind. Being a good soldier and doing what you are told is one thing, but for Petraeus to admit that he hadn't even thought about whether the war he was commanding, the war that our soldiers were dying for, was making our country safer is an astounding admission of detachment.
General Petraeus should not have merely thought about this issue, he should have repeatedly asked the question of his superiors, including the decider in chief - if the purpose of the war in Iraq was to make America safer or not.
The only reason that I can imagine as to why General Petraeus failed to cogitate on this critical issue is that he was told in private the reason for the war in Iraq, and that the real reason had nothing to do with making America safer. Under those circumstances, it is perfectly natural that the question had never crossed his mind.
Dr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published over 45 scientific articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org, and is a Managing Editor at OpEdNews.com.
I am reminded of (now Supreme Court Justice) Clarence Thomas saying at his confirmation hearings that he had never "thought about" the issue of abortion in a legal context (even after law school and clerking).
The only suitable response (to Patraeus OR Thomas) should have been: "Sir, you are either lying to me or you are too stupid to be sitting there, there are no other options. I don't even need to know which it is. Either way, you have proven yourself to be worthless. You are excused."
by
Charlie L (2 articles, 2 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 638 comments)
on Thursday, September 13, 2007 at 2:22:52 PM
between saying, Sir I don't, know. I haven't sat down and sorted it out in my mind. And it never having crossed his mind.
A general is tasked to do a job. The one that definately SHOULD have sat down and sorted it out in his mind is George W Bush. President of the United States and commander in chief of the armed forces.
I am not defending Petraeus. Petraeus is a soldier. But I am suggesting that George W Bush hasn't gotten nearly enough heat for his failings and shortcoming in the far more critical role he has as have some of his appointments. The buck should stop with the President to answer the question and to convince the America people that America is safer.
In my personal opinion America (and the average individual American) is most definately NOT safer. And to go out into the world with an American passport or an American accent would in my considered opinion be a more risky proposition post the Bush decision to invade Iraq then prior it. People like me who thought better of American now think worse of it.
What is wrong profoundly wrong with this faith-based President is that he doesn't show much evidence of independent thought, certainly not the amount of thought that a nation of 300 million should be able to expect in its highest executive. Decisions by the decider that really do affect the life and death existential risks of his people should be made on an evaluation of the evidence not on prejudice or faith.
by
Brett Paatsch (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 21 diaries, 961 comments)
on Thursday, September 13, 2007 at 8:05:23 PM
Gen. Petraeus' body language told the story more completely and truly than any words he spoke. He was clearly uncomfortable during his questioning. He was selling something that he personally didn't buy. I think the bit of testimony deserves to be posted again:
WARNER: 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, this strategy, that if you continue, you are making America safer?
PETRAEUS: Sir, I believe that this is indeed the best course of action to achieve our objections 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 Multinational Force in Iraq.
Clearly, when Senator Warner was asking these questions, Petraeus was incredibly uncomfortable. He was fidgety. His face told the story better than his words could have. He had been caught in a crafty trap, and he knew it!
After all, Petraeus is a soldier. He is not a diplomat, nor is he the commander in chief. He was nothing more than a way to make DUBYA seem right. He was a shill, and he knew it.
That said, I don't feel sorry for him in the least. He clearly thought that he'd get through it without having to answer any really tough questions. I am sure he didn't expect such a pointed question from a Republican. I just wonder what was going on in his head. I was wondering how many invectives, expletives, and appellations were flying through his head as he was trying to answer without looking like as much of an idiot as the man for whom he spoke. Maybe it went something like this...
"Oh, shit, why the fuck is this asshole asking me such a fucked-up question? How did I allow my ass to get into this fucking sling? Shit, I'm never going too pull out of this tailspin. Fuck! Shit! Why didn't I tell that asshole Bush to shove it up his pathetic ass? Shit, I am never going to live this down!"
Sad indeed, but it tells a sort of truth that should have been told years ago. Blind allegiance to anyone or anything can only lead to embarrassment, looking like a fool, and death. I wonder if Petraeus is now questioning whether he wants to be a part of this sham any longer.
Blessed be! Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Thursday, September 13, 2007 at 9:58:57 PM
I agree Pappy, and thanks for posting the full exchange between them. That exchange was one of the ones I caught live, and I was immediately struck by the fact that Republicans must be squirming in their seats as their man in Iraq said live on TV that he doesn’t know if the war is making America safer. If not, then what precisely is the purpose of the war?
Some reports suggested that Petraeus was stoic and unflustered. I watched probably half of the hearings over two days, and I thought he looked like he just swallowed broken glass. He was extremely uncomfortable, and he acted like he was just saying what he was supposed to say, not what he really thought.
It was disgusting to hear Bush last night put all the weight on Petraeus by saying it was up to the General to decide when the troops come home. That is total crap. Bush is calling the shots, and blaming the negative outcomes on Petraeus.
The debate will shift now from how long will the surge last to when are we going to draw down the numbers substantially.
by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 598 comments)
on Friday, September 14, 2007 at 6:11:59 AM
The militatry term for Petraeus is the same, ironically, as that used about Colin Powell; "Water Walkers".
They both are so consumed with their careers and advancement that such as truth, rightness, justice and the like do not enter their minds at all. A military man must, of course, obey the orders of his commander in chief, and I understand that the General's testimony plainly showed that his was not to reason why, his was but to do or die. Of course we find those orders and the strategies that evolve from them unpalatable, as we find him personally more than a bit self serving. But what would you expect from such as he?
We have seen a number of ranking military officiers accept early retirement rather than swallow the facts of this horrid war for profit and power. This are exceptional men and women to be sure. General Petraeus is simply not among them.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Friday, September 14, 2007 at 9:31:09 AM
Petraeus was only being a true conservative in having a selective narrow thought process. They will only "think" about what their leaders want them to "think".
by
Fr. Jon (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments)
on Friday, September 14, 2007 at 11:49:35 AM
Some reports suggested that Petraeus was stoic and unflustered. I watched probably half of the hearings over two days, and I thought he looked like he just swallowed broken glass. He was extremely uncomfortable, and he acted like he was just saying what he was supposed to say, not what he really thought.
I watched excerpts of the exchange on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and even in the limited amount of coverage given, only a blind person would have thought that Petraeus was comfortable, stoic, or anything other than ready to jump out of his own skin. He knew what he was saying was wrong, a lie, less than the truth, whatever you want to call it. The mere fact that he spoke the truth out of school when pressed, "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 Multinational Force in Iraq," shows me that he knew from the get-go that he was lying...and that he was not really up for the challenge.
It also shows me that, in deference to those who are labeling Petraeus everything but a white man, his conscience was getting to him. Perhaps it still is. That may wind up being the downfall of DUBYA. He is the deceiver, and few around him, with the exception of Dick(LESS), can match him in being a pathological liar. He keeps trying to get others to lie for him, and no one can do it with the zest of which he himself is capable. I guess that even some of DUBYA's biggest boot licking, sycophantic, toadies were taught that honesty is the best policy when they were kids...and they took that lesson to heart, like yours truly.
It is my hope that the left-handed honesty shown by Petraeus in that unscripted moment might become the drum beat that finally signals the end of the DUBYA legacy. Now that we have heard from the horse's mouth that we are no safer than on the morning of September 10, 2001, maybe the remaining sycophants will realize the lies with which their names have been associated.
Mind you, I am NOT holding my breath on this issue. I have been wrong before. It's just a hope, a meager, failing, nearly comatose hope.
Blessed be! Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Friday, September 14, 2007 at 1:17:44 PM
You have most assuredly proven you are one Good Soldier and one who will back up his commander-in-chief .. all the way ? Right ? It is strange how Truth can come back to Bite us in the Rear..when we are least ..expecting it to. That is what has occured here. You are a Quite intelligent, ambitious man, but obviously your conscience took a wrong turn somewhere along the line. Was it When bush got to You..and offered you This Position You are in ? Is your conscience going to Take a hike Back to you ( Now that Your Slip of the Lip to John Warner..before the Senate Armed Services Committee ) told the world that you had no mind of your own..but had chosen to follow your C-n-C right over the cliff ..if That was where your Following his orders Led You to ? I think you are realizing you are on the wrong track following the wrong engine. And There is only one route for you to take now....that will lead you back to being the Kind of Man And Leader you always envisioned being . Gen. Petraeus, YOU are a man of moral integrity , or you would never have reached the status you now hold. The only way out of this bush-morass you have inadvertently gotten yourself enmeshed...is to Retire, Resign your post, OR Just plain admit to the world that you are too much of a man to want to be a part of what you now know you are embroiled in..up to your eyeballs. Redeem yourself ..now..before your integrity and character is irrevokably destroyed. Your own sense of right and wrong Showed..in that 'hearing'( Even if it did Sorta slip out of the side of your mouth. ) Don't blow your chance at being the man you set out to be before bush infiltrated himself into your dreams ! You Can Do it. Make right of all this wrong before it is too late. YOU have that Power. Use it for your good..and for the rest of this country and the world. Speaking up with The Truth will stop more innocent lives to be lost..and quell the on-going violence against a country that was in no manner responsible for The "Excuse bush Holds so close to his thumping gizzard of a heart...as His pretext for invading and occupying Iraq. This is the only honorable thing you can do that will truly define you as a man among men... And square your conscience with your God. VGF
by
VGF (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 39 comments)
on Saturday, September 15, 2007 at 12:24:44 PM
