General Patraeus Contradicts McCain About Talking To Enemies - Shares Obama's View

One of the big criticisms that McCain has used to attack Barack Obama has to do with Obama's willingness to talk with America's enemies. They believe that it's naive for Obama to talk to an enemy without a long list of demands that the adversary must agree to before even sitting down at the table (you would think that the reason for talking would be to negotiate many of the contentious issues, so how can you make a laundry list of demands before negotiations even start?). The McCain/Republican Party philosophy is to not talk to enemies at all if they don't have to.... but to attack them instead. One of the major figures that McCain likes to throw in Obama's face every chance he gets is General David Petraeus, as if Patraeus is one of their puppets.

But this week, General Patraeus smacked down the McCain argument, saying instead that the U.S. should talk to its enemies. He mentioned that the U.S. should be open to talking to the Taliban in particular. This completely undercuts what McCain has been saying for the past 2 months on the campaign trail and it pretty much wrecks his entire line of criticism of Obama on that issue. Patraeus, The new commander of Centcom and former top General in Iraq, is responsible for formulating a plan for turning Afghanistan around.

Meanwhile, a new National Intelligence Estimate (or NIE) indicates that the situation in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate. In fact, the situation there is now described as a "downward spiral". NATO and the U.S. in particular, doesn't have the manpower needed to fulfill the mission. The drug trade (poppy farming) makes up at least 50% of the Afghan economy. I have been warning on this blog for the past two years that the problem with the drug trade would undercut other efforts in Afghanistan. The U.S., Europe and the UN failed to establish an alternative Afghan economy after the fall of the Taliban. They failed to create jobs and investment there. This led to a situation where people fell back to what they were doing before to survive- Poppy farming, and the criminal activity surrounding it (warlords earning protection money, smuggling, bribery, intimidation, government corruption, etc). The money generated by the drug trade funds the Talibans activities.

The General Petraeus & Ryan Crocker Senate Testimony On Iraq

Watch Full Senate Hearing On Iraq Progress

This special hearing was for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Watch Hearing

Part 1

Part 2

Video of David Petraeus Testimony On Progress In Iraq

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

What Are Iraqis Saying About the Surge?

70% of Iraqi's in Survey Say The Surge Has Made Situation Worse

Most Iraqis don't believe that the surge has been successful, despite General David Petraeus's fuzzy math showing progress across Iraq. [1] [2] [3] Iraqi opinion of the "Surge" was gathered as part of a major new joint survey by ABC, BBC, and NHK (Japan Broadcasting Service).


See ABC Report

See The Full Survey Report (pdf)

Report below from Washington Post

Poll Highlights Disconnect Between U.S. Commanders & Iraqis

By Megan Greenwell and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, September 10, 2007

BAGHDAD, Sept. 10 -- Seven in 10 Iraqis believe the U.S. troop buildup in Baghdad and Anbar province has made security worse in those areas and nearly half want coalition forces to leave immediately, according to a new poll conducted by ABC News, the BBC and the Japanese broadcaster NHK.

In most areas, the poll reveals a basic disconnect between U.S. commanders' view of a steadily improving situation in Iraq and a bleaker outlook among Iraqis. As Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker testify before Congress about the results of the troop increase, poll numbers show that ordinary Iraqis are significantly more likely to say "things are going badly" than in the early days of the increased U.S. military presence in March.

Fewer than one-quarter of Iraqis report that things in Iraq are going well, down from 35 percent in a similar poll released in March, while the number of people who expect conditions to improve in the next year has declined precipitously.

In November 2005, shortly before Iraq's historic open elections, 69 percent of residents said they believed life would be better in a year. But in the poll this March, only 40 percent had a positive outlook; now, less than a quarter of Iraqis, 23 percent, expect the country to be better off a year from now.

More than six in 10 Iraqis now say the U.S.-led invasion in spring 2003 was a mistake. That negative assessment is 11 percentage points higher than it was in March. For the first time, more than half of Shiites, 51 percent, say it was wrong for coalition forces to invade Iraq, an event that toppled a power structure in which minority Sunnis dominated Shiites and Kurds.

Nearly half of all Iraqis now want coalition forces out of the country immediately, a 12-point increase from March, but there were sharp sectarian and ethnic divisions on this subject. Nearly three-quarters of Sunnis want the troops to leave now, as do 44 percent of Shiites. Only about one in 10 Kurds want an immediate withdrawal.

Nearly six in 10 Iraqis say attacks on coalition forces are "acceptable," up six percentage points from March, including a 15-point jump among Shiites, 50 percent of whom now call such actions acceptable.

At the same time, some attitudes toward foreign troops and the country's own security forces have become less negative since earlier this year. Nineteen percent of all Iraqis place primary blame for the violence in the country on U.S. and coalition forces, down from 31 percent in March. Public confidence in Iraq's army and police force has increased somewhat and the percentage of people who have a "great deal" or "a lot" of confidence in local militia groups has decreased.

Moreover, the troop increase appears to have had some benefit for Iraqis. Residents of Anbar province and Baghdad -- where most of the additional units are based -- are more likely than they were in March to rate local security positively.

But overall, the Iraqi assessment of the situation remains dire. All of the 13 quality-of-life measures tested in the poll are rated poorly, including overwhelmingly negative appraisals of energy supplies and the availability of jobs. Only one -- the rating of local schools -- has improved from March.

Only a quarter of Iraqis report feeling "very safe" in their own neighborhoods, unchanged from March, just after nearly 30,000 additional U.S. troops started arriving. In Baghdad, where ratings of local conditions are particularly negative, none of those polled said they feel very safe, although fewer now feel "not safe at all" than in the March poll. Six in 10 believe that security is worse in Iraq than it was six months ago, and just 11 percent believe security has improved.

Iraqis blame their government, in part, for their troubles. While half now believe the parliament is willing to make necessary compromises to bring peace and security to the country, two-thirds of Iraqis disapprove of how the national government is performing. And Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's own approval rating sits at just 33 percent, mirroring President Bush's approval rating among the American public in the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Ratings of the Iraqi government and the prime minister have both dropped since March.

During the past six months, disapproval of the Shiite-led government is up 15 percentage points among Shiites to 47 percent. Among Kurds, it is up 24 points to 53 percent.As in March, nearly all Sunnis polled thought the government was doing a bad job.

As for the structure of the Iraqi government, more than six in 10 Iraqis support a unified country, with the central government in Baghdad. But again, sectarian divisions are stark. While 97 percent of Sunnis and 56 percent of Shiites want a single, unified country, only 9 percent of Kurds favor that approach. Forty-nine percent of Kurds want to divide the country into separate, independent states and another 42 percent would like Iraq to be a group of states with a federal government in Baghdad.

The poll was based on face-to-face interviews between Aug. 17 and 24, among a random national sample of 2,212 Iraqi adults. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. The fieldwork was conducted by D3 Systems of Vienna and KA Research Ltd. of Istanbul.

Interesting Symbolism

General Petraeus's Microphone Not working. LOL

still watching... will comment later.

Video will also be linked here.

The Myth of Iraq's Anbar Province

The Bush Administration is claiming that the "Surge" plan is responsible for the Sunni's in Anbar switching sides and helping U.S. troops in the fight against Al Qaeda. The White House and the media, as well as some members of Congress want to give General David Petraeus all of the credit for what is happening there.

But Sunni fighters began the process of turning on Al Qaeda long before the U.S. Troop Surge was even announced; long before General David Petraeus even arrived to move the plan forward. The shift in Anbar Province began as early as 2005 and carried on through 2006 [2] [3] . The current Surge of course, did not begin until this year.

In fact, Sunni Tribal leaders in Anbar had asked for help as early as 2005, but General George Casey- the U.S. General in charge of all forces in Iraq at the time- refused to offer assistance.
This is clearly an initiative that was spearheaded by the Iraqi's themselves from the beginning, not by the Bush administration.

The Bush crew wants to use Anbar as an example of what can happen in other parts of Iraq.... yet they have only had a limited impact on what has happened there. Most of the successes in Anbar have come from the people who live there, not from U.S. military strategy. But next week, the White House will spin the Anbar story as their own success. And I suspect that the American public, in keeping with tradition, will swallow the bait whole.

The Surge

What has been the impact of the U.S. troop surge overall?

The Facts Regarding the Surge

Iraqi Deaths rose 23% in the month of July over June, although U.S. troop deaths dipped slightly. The Iraqi death toll for July was 2024. And August was the 2nd deadliest death toll for Iraqis this year. Furthermore, the political situation in Iraq is still unstable. (8) (9) (10) (11) Quality of life is also on the decline in Iraq. (12) (13)



The Surge results can be summed up by the following 3 facts:

1). Iraqis are still dying in high numbers, despite the surge. (The Iraqi people...remember them? The main reason for the surge was to cut the bloodshed between Iraqis. (14) (15) (10)

2). The average number of attacks across the Country has actually increased during the "surge" period.

3). Ramstein Airbase in Germany has seen high numbers of U.S. casualties during the surge period. So the intensity of attacks on U.S. troops has been sustained during the surge.