WHAT I HEARD WHEN GENERAL PETRAEUS AND AMBASSADOR CROCKER REPORTED TO CONGRESS ON THE IRAQ WAR

"We've all got to stop and say: every day, young men and women are being killed, their bodies are being torn apart in an insane war that started with spin--which is a nice word for 'lies'--and that continues with spin. Why are we just standing here? Why are we allowing this massive blunder to continue?"

Phil Donahue

***********************

(Note: I heard a lot of “uhs” coming out of Crocker---I saw a lot of metals covering Petraeus.

Mad Plato)

I'M A FOUR-STAR GENERAL AND HAVE STRATEGIC THOUGHTS

THE WAY AHEAD

IT’S A PROCESS RATHER THAN A LIGHT SWITCH.

WORK IN PROGRESS

IT'S A HELL OF A MESS

WE HAVEN’T TURNED ANY CORNER

THERE IS NO LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL

THE CHAMPAGNE BOTTLE HAS BEEN PUSHED TO THE BACK OF THE REFRIGERATOR

BUT THERE IS PROGRESS

WE'VE ALIENATED MOST OF THE GLOBAL POPULATION

THE PLATES...THE SCREWS...IT’S PHENOMENAL

IT'S WITHIN THE GOLDEN HOUR OF TRAUMA

WE ARE SEEING BOTTOMS UP RECONCILIATION

BOTTOMS UP AND TOP DOWN LINK

IRAQ IS BOTH HARD AND COMPLICATED

HARD DOES NOT MEAN HOPELESS

BATTLE FIELD GEOMETRY

CONSEQUENCES COULD BE EXTREMELY GRAVE

COPS ON THE BEAT

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

THE CHALLENGES ARE REAL

WAR IS NOT A LINEAR PHENOMENON---IT IS A CALCULUS

A BILLION DOLLARS ISN'T PENCIL DUST

MONEY BECOMES YOUR MOST IMPORTANT COMMUNICATOR

IMPROVING THEIR BUDGET EXECUTION EFFORTS

BUDGET EXECUTION FOR 2007 WILL COME IN AT 62%

PRIMING THE PUMP

THE WAY FORWARD IS CONDITIONS-BASED

TAKE YOUR HAND OFF THE BICYCLE SEAT AND LET THEM PEDAL THEMSELVES

WE'LL KNOW WHEN WE GET THERE, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'LL GET THERE

BRIGADE TEAMS

MILITIA GANG CRIMINALS

STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK ARRANGEMENT

NOBODY THINKS THERE IS A DIPLOMATIC SURGE

WE'VE GOT TO GET SOME MATRIX FOR PEOPLE

ENGAGEMENT

OPEN-ENDED COMMITMENT

And this from Senator Russ Feingold to the General and the Ambassador:

I hope you won't take it personally when I say that I wish we were also hearing today from those who could help us look at Iraq from a broader perspective. The participation at this hearing of those charged with regional and global responsibilities would have given us the chance to discuss how the war in Iraq is undermining our national security. It might have helped us answer the most important question we face – not "are we winning or losing in Iraq?" but "are we winning or losing in the global fight against al Qaeda?"
Like many Americans, I am gravely concerned by how bogged down we are in Iraq. Our huge, open-ended military presence there is not only undermining our ability to respond to the global threat posed by al Qaeda, but it is also creating greater regional instability, serving as a disincentive for Iraqis to reach political reconciliation, straining our military, and piling up debt for future generations to repay.
I am pleased that violence in parts of the country has declined, but as the increase in violence in Mosul and recent events in Basra and now Baghdad indicate, long-term prospects for reconciliation appear to be just as shaky as they were before the surge. In fact, the drop in violence could have serious costs, as it is partly attributable to the deals we have struck with local militias, all of which could make national reconciliation that much more difficult.
We need to redeploy our troops from Iraq and I am disappointed that you are calling for a halt in troop reductions, General Petraeus, because the presence of about 140,000 troops in Iraq will exacerbate the conflict, not stabilize it, and it will certainly not contribute to our overall national security. Some have suggested that we should stay in Iraq until reconciliation occurs. They have it backwards -- our departure is likely to force factions to the negotiating table in an attempt to finally create a viable power-sharing agreement.
If we redeploy, Iraq will no longer be the "‘cause celebre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world," as the Intelligence Community so clearly stated. Iran, as well as Turkey, Syria, and other regional actors, will have to decide if Iraqi instability is really in their interests once we are no longer on the hook. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we will be able to adequately address what must be our top priority – the threat posed by al Qaeda around the globe, and particularly its safe haven in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. Nothing could be clearer than the need to refocus all our instruments of national power to combat this threat.
Redeployment does not mean abandoning Iraq. We must work for a peaceful outcome in that country. But if we continue to leave our military caught up in the sectarian divisions that consume Iraq, we will be doing so at grave risk to Iraq's progress, the region's stability, and our own national security.

*******************************

And

From Painful Performance

By Robert Scheer April 9, 2008 http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080421/truthdig

General Betray Us? Of course he has. MoveOn.org can hardly be expected to recycle its slogan from last September, when General David Petraeus testified in support of escalating the US war in Iraq, given the hysterical denunciations that worthy group received at the time. But it was right then--as it would be to repeat the charge now.
By undercutting the widespread support for getting out of Iraq, Petraeus did indeed betray the American public, siding with an enormously unpopular President who wants to stay the course in Iraq for personal and political reasons that run contrary to genuine national security interests. Once again, the President is passing the buck to the uniformed military to justify continuing a ludicrous imperial adventure, and the good general has dutifully performed.
So why are we surprised? Why do we expect the generals to lead us on the path to peace when that is the professional task of statesmen and not warriors? It is an abdication of civilian control of the military, the basic principle of American constitutional governance, to assign a central role to an active-duty general to make the decision to end the war. It betrays the legacy warnings of our two most famous wartime generals, George Washington and Dwight D. Eisenhower.
American history offers no greater heroes, not because of their considerable success in battle but because they gained the wisdom to sound the alarm against unbridled militarism so passionately and effectively. The farewell addresses of both those departing generals-turned-president still stand as the essential bookends for what has been written about the limits on military adventure required for democracy's survival. Washington's plea to the nation "to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism" sets the standard for enlightened political discourse. A close second is Eisenhower's warning that, "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex."

IT’S THE OIL STUPID!