See Video of the official Progress report on Iraq given by General David Patraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker.
I find it interesting how Crocker used our Civil Rights movement as reasoning for staying the course in Iraq. Unreal! His point was... the U.S. has gone through its own turmoil & growing pains...and Iraq should be allowed to do the same. However, I say this may be an apples and oranges comparison. There was no widespread sectarian killings in the U.S., although there was injustice on a wide scale and there certainly were murders and abuse taking place. But the two situations are not the same.
It seems as if the Bush administration is grabbing at straws because it is quickly running out of options. Petraeus also (as expected) placed a lot of attention on Anbar Province and attempted to take credit for it, although this was more of an effort by the Iraqi's themselves which started long before the "Surge" took effect.
"More time", "Stay the course", "more time", "stay the course", "more time".....
This will be the overriding message from the White House, under both Republicans and Democrats, for the next 10 years. I have stated all along that the U.S. is not leaving Iraq anytime in the near future, and the fact that the U.S. is making long-term plans and building permanent bases there is evidence of that.
Politicians in Washington still have not come clean and informed the American public of long-term U.S. plans there. Nor have they explained to the public what the U.S. interests are in Iraq. (Those interests are #1. Guaranteeing access to oil. #2. Using Iraq as a jumping off point for projecting U.S. power throughout the Middle East, and #3. Establishing a buffer against what U.S. politicians see as a growing threat from Iran). U.S. political leaders probably sense that explaining this to the public now would create too much opposition to the continued occupation of Iraq. So they have settled on a strategy of leading the American people on ever so slowly... milking the clock for more time, until "more time" turns into 5 years, 10 years, and perhaps 15 or more. They want to deliberately make the American people believe that U.S. troops will be coming home at some point in the near future, as a way of slowing and calming public opposition to the U.S. presence there.
See Opening Statement by General Petraeus during a Joint Session of the House Armed Services Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. The U.S. Senate will hold hearings tomorrow, 9/11/07.
WATCH ENTIRE HEARING BELOW
Watch Part 1
Watch Part 2
********************************
See Report From The BBC
Report from New York Times
Reaction from U.S. Presidential Candidates
____________________________
See coverage (and fact checking) at Think Progress
I find it interesting how Crocker used our Civil Rights movement as reasoning for staying the course in Iraq. Unreal! His point was... the U.S. has gone through its own turmoil & growing pains...and Iraq should be allowed to do the same. However, I say this may be an apples and oranges comparison. There was no widespread sectarian killings in the U.S., although there was injustice on a wide scale and there certainly were murders and abuse taking place. But the two situations are not the same.
It seems as if the Bush administration is grabbing at straws because it is quickly running out of options. Petraeus also (as expected) placed a lot of attention on Anbar Province and attempted to take credit for it, although this was more of an effort by the Iraqi's themselves which started long before the "Surge" took effect.
"More time", "Stay the course", "more time", "stay the course", "more time".....
This will be the overriding message from the White House, under both Republicans and Democrats, for the next 10 years. I have stated all along that the U.S. is not leaving Iraq anytime in the near future, and the fact that the U.S. is making long-term plans and building permanent bases there is evidence of that.
Politicians in Washington still have not come clean and informed the American public of long-term U.S. plans there. Nor have they explained to the public what the U.S. interests are in Iraq. (Those interests are #1. Guaranteeing access to oil. #2. Using Iraq as a jumping off point for projecting U.S. power throughout the Middle East, and #3. Establishing a buffer against what U.S. politicians see as a growing threat from Iran). U.S. political leaders probably sense that explaining this to the public now would create too much opposition to the continued occupation of Iraq. So they have settled on a strategy of leading the American people on ever so slowly... milking the clock for more time, until "more time" turns into 5 years, 10 years, and perhaps 15 or more. They want to deliberately make the American people believe that U.S. troops will be coming home at some point in the near future, as a way of slowing and calming public opposition to the U.S. presence there.
See Opening Statement by General Petraeus during a Joint Session of the House Armed Services Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. The U.S. Senate will hold hearings tomorrow, 9/11/07.
WATCH ENTIRE HEARING BELOW
Watch Part 1
Watch Part 2
See Report From The BBC
Report from New York Times
Reaction from U.S. Presidential Candidates
____________________________
See coverage (and fact checking) at Think Progress
Posts
2 comments:
He's a liar. Period. Don't believe anything he says.
They are now attempting to make the return of 20,000-30,000 troops look like an actual withdrawal...
that is how they are trying to package it.
Once again they are trying to fool the American public.
The pullback of the surge troops was something that was already scheduled to happen. They are just going back to the normal level of 130,000 troops. Back to where they started.
Interesting that they will be doing a lot of the pullback of troops during the heart of campaign season.
Post a Comment