The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
General Petraeus
h3ndu
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So what's your take on this D&D?
I think it's pretty amazing that people are laying into GEN Petraeus like this. I think he's trying to do his job and that he's basiclly being told he doesn't know up from down.
And the slander in the paper, that doesn't sit right with me, but that's just what I think.
Would be interested to hear the thoughts around here.
Edit - Regardless of political views, I think it's important to support this man. He represents our armed forces, and shitting all over him is shitting all over our armed forces.
GEN Betray Us (Link)
I think it's pretty amazing that people are laying into GEN Petraeus like this. I think he's trying to do his job and that he's basiclly being told he doesn't know up from down.
And the slander in the paper, that doesn't sit right with me, but that's just what I think.
Would be interested to hear the thoughts around here.
Edit - Regardless of political views, I think it's important to support this man. He represents our armed forces, and shitting all over him is shitting all over our armed forces.
GEN Betray Us (Link)
Lo Que Sea, Cuando Sea, Donde Sea.
h3ndu on
0
Posts
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
I think people expected more from him then he gave. He was billed as this independent thinker who won't toe the party line and will give a frank, honest portrayal of the situation in Iraq. Then he gets up there and reads talking points that may as well have had FROM THE DESK OF KARL ROVE printed at the top of the page.
I think the full page ad was a little overboard... but hell, that should be MOVEON.ORG's tagline...
I'm a lot more disappointed in his steadfast backing of the Administration's decisions than his performance in Iraq. I suppose it's hard to make it to General these days if you stir the pot too much, though.
So he's a liar becuase what he reported something some people didn't want to hear?
Edit: Being a Gen. is a post that takes time to get to (you're part of the boys club if you make it past LTC), and if you're there you won't rock the boat too much so as not to lose your spot obviously, but why so much hate? Is this more of an attack on bush or on him?
PS Have I been reading a different report? As far as I'm aware, he has only said that the 'surge' has increased stability in affected areas, and that this is likely to be improved on as long as it remains in force. Which pretty much everyone agrees on; the question has always been, what happens when the troop numbers are brought down again, on which I haven't seen him comment.
Why is that "shitting all over the armed forces?"
Doesn't mean he wasn't an REMF.
As for Moveon.org, they're idiots as usual and the shit they throw ends up covering the Democrats. It doesn't help the Dems running for Prez to not condemn the ad and this may be an issue in 2008. Lets wait and see...
Er, unless Bush took his talking points from Petraeus rather than the other way around. Can you prove which? No.
I never said he was lying. I am glad to hear that now I need General level experience to have an opinion on Iraq though. It should limit my conversations and opinions a great deal.
I said that people expected more from him. You know... PEOPLE
Maybe he worked in the S1?
Bonus points to any Army guys who gets that.
No confidence in a groups leadership tends to mean no confidence in that group.
I have similar degrees in demonstrating that common sense isn't always correct. Syllabus includes: reasoning, logic and proof, rather than old wives tales and assumptions.
By the way, don't be so modest - you forgot your PhD in Liberal Bias.
Er, yes actually it does. He was a frontline infantry officer who saw combat service. != REMF
Unless you mean that he is now a staff officer? Shock news fella, not many generals on the front line. This is an intelligent thing.
PS By the way Richy, have I agreed with his testimony? No. I have simply pointed out that much of the depressingly predictable rush to demonise him, both elsewhere and here, is very light on facts.
Put it this way: the man has been General in charge of theatre in Iraq. That gives his opinions a certain credibility. Unless they can show similar credentials, nobody here has such credibility. So the burden of proof is on you to show that he is lying, not myself or Petraeus to prove himself correct.
And you should not be afraid to whip out your credentials in journalistic integrity from the Brit Hume School of Broadcast and Head Up Your Ass Analysis... or the BHSBHUYAA
I have an outstanding level confidence in the individual soldiers to do the jobs they are assigned to with a high level of competence.
That doesn't mean I think the overall effort is going to work, since the problems are coming from the top down, not bottom-up.
I guess the point is that I want someone to give it to me straight, good or bad. I dunno if I can say that he has, given the information we have now.
Only in your fantasy world.
You lost me. Since when does lacking confidence in something mean I'm "shitting all over it"?
I think Petraeus is a shill. I admire the courage of our soldiers that deserve to be admired. I have no respect for someone just because they wear a fancy uniform or "served our country" for x y and z years. Saying Petraeus is an idiot does not equal saying our soldiers are idiots.
Explain what you mean or kindly shut the fuck up.
Since when?
Um, I'd have to question that assessment of his career. Generals don't usually get their first Bronze Star when they're generals.
He later explained that wasn't a question for him to answer and was beyond his role, thats up to the Homeland Security leadership for example.
Nice way to avoid my question. I'll assume you are admitting you have no actual experience in Iraq, and can show no factual basis demonstrating that Petraeus is wrong.
I answered your questions several posts up. Like I said, remove head from sphincter, then post.
That's awesome. He should tell his boss to stop fucking conflating Iraq with homeland security, so poor little souls like me don't get mixed signals that the war in Iraq is making us safer.
I don't see why people deserve almost unlimited reverence just because they used to be good at killing other people.
He's just a fucking guy. He's a guy in power, sure. He heads our armed forces.
Ooooh no. Not our armed forces? Not the one force stopping fascism/terrorism/insert worry of the year here from taking over teh hole worldz!
The army kills people. They're necessary, sure. But this war is a farce, a shame on our country, and this man deserves absolutely no respect just because he wears a costume when it's not Halloween.
Well that's a nice attack dog piece, apart from the bit where it deals with his career from comissioning to Lt Col with one (rather short) paragraph with no information. So that would be the non-staff phase of his career. Where infantry officers see combat.
And, I'm sorry, your complaint is that he hasn't won a DS medal? Plenty of officers don't win medals. Plenty of good officers, who don't charge in like heros, but run things from the reserve section - where they are meant to be - where they have an appreciation of the situation and don't get themselves killed, leaving their men without leadership. It's not the only way to do things, but it is a pretty effective one, which might be why it is the way standard infantry tactics teaches officers to do things.
Bad dog
That's moronic. It's akin to the "respect your parents because they're your parents" level of idiocy. Respect must be earned. Support must be earned. And General "Given an infinite amount of time and an infinite amount of troops and the ability to change reality we could succeed in Iraq" has earned neither.
Missed first post, apologies.
Fair enough. But you did say:
That sounds suspiciously like your opinion right there. And it implies that he was saying what the administration wanted him to say. So, what PEOPLE were saying, eh? At least man up to your hyperbole.
You don't have to have a General's level of experience to have an opinion, but unless you have, er, any experience, it might be wise to be a little more circumspect with that opinion.
Yeah, for the Imperium of Mankind in the 40K universe. It also works for a Space Marine, "Brother Captain Petraeus". :P
As for the real guy, unless tours go over 15 months, the extra surge troops go home in april of next year with no replacements so the Army is back down to pre-surge strength.
That gives him about 7 months. A lot can happen in 7 months, either way, which will demonstrate how good this guy really is.
Margaret Thatcher
* William J. Crowe, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President Ronald Reagan
* Joseph Hoar, former Commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East
* H. Allen Holmes, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations
* Merrill McPeak, former Air Force Chief of Staff
* Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack, Jr. (Ret.) (commanded troops in Iraq)
* Maj. Gen. John Batiste (Ret.) (commanded troops in Iraq)
* Lieut. Gen. Greg Newbold (Ret.)
* Lt. Gen. Robert Gard
* Brig. Gen. John Johns
There you go Sarastro. Qualified, decorated, high-ranking military officers, some of which were involved in this war, and who disagree with you. Now submit to your own "we can't disagree with someone more qualified than us" logic and shut up.