gen petraeus is a disgrace to our country

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 12:21 PM

he is setting himself up for a run for political office, I can't imagine anyone more well coached by McCain

He won't, when he's supposed to testify fully, say whether the Basra operation was properly prepared

He says after the surge is drawn down, and everything is sorted out, they need 45 days to "evaluate" then 2, 3, 4...who knows how many months to continue a 2nd evaluation process

Basically we're keeping 140,000 troops until the next president, and then he'll take his cue from that president

He blames Iran for hundresd of American deaths, yet we're allied with the Badr Corp running the entire government, which is a completely Iranian-made and still well connected militia...gives a completely inaccurate view in order to further the political career for McCain and himself

That's just the start, it's still before noon, god knows how else he'll continue to disgrace our country...we look like our military promotion process is a complete failure since Bush took office

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 12:26 PM

more disgraceful...he knows the senior shia clergy are staying away with this with a 10 foot stick, but he's saying it's "up in the air"

yeah...paradise is right around the corner, the Mahdi army is going to unilaterally disarm after winning in Basra

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 12:37 PM

petraeus refuses to speak up on how Iran is financially connected to the Badr Corp, or how it still exists as a paramilitary organization

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 12:40 PM

Wow, Shia's have weapons from Shia countries...hey, in the US-Vietnam war the AK-47s were Chinese, remind me, did Nixon think China was our enemy, or did he visit them to open up a friendly dialogue?

the man is unable to give one honest answer to any question that could hurt the GOP

kinggovernor · 04-08-2008, 12:44 PM

didn't you guys already try this? and it failed immensely, https://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.html

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 12:57 PM

he won't even answer moderate republicans like Collins...and he says 1000 desertions wasn't bad because "Basra was a very bad situation" so it's entirely expected

wow, talk about a low bar...tens of billions of dollars for training and 1000+ desertions every battle is fine

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 01:05 PM

praises the failed de-baathification...total lie...christ this is so pathetic

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 01:26 PM

won't disagree that it's actually Iran...not thugs or Al-Sadr who run the Mahdi Army...oh fucking kay...lie #4985749854

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 02:13 PM

now he's lying and trying to imply that Iraqis pay for the Sunni fighters we hired and may turn on us fairly quickly if we don't pay more of them and more consistently

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 02:17 PM

crocker is a POS too, but at least everyone knows he is a hack...lying about the Sadr-Maliki showdown

Phantom · 04-08-2008, 02:42 PM

Everyone I disagree with is a disgrace to this country as well.

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by Phantom

Everyone I disagree with is a disgrace to this country as well.

I only think one person is...someone who is paid to be bipartisan and report to the congress accurately and is doing neither...fuck he isn't even helping the military

good response to how all my points are wrong though, BTW

So basically, im 100% right, but I should have a nicer tone?

Phantom · 04-08-2008, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I only think one person is...someone who is paid to be bipartisan and report to the congress accurately and is doing neither...fuck he isn't even helping the military

good response to how all my points are wrong though, BTW

So basically, im 100% right, but I should have a nicer tone?

I don't know if you're right or wrong, but I have a feeling he has spent quite a bit more time studying the issues that he is testifying about and is not lying left and right as you suggest.

Thorgrim · 04-08-2008, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Phantom

I don't know if you're right or wrong, but I have a feeling he has spent quite a bit more time studying the issues that he is testifying about and is not lying left and right as you suggest.

Like Richard Perle and Dick Cheney, they have decades more experience with Arabs

motivez · 04-08-2008, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by Phantom

I don't know ... but I have a feeling ...

So no facts, but a feeling?

Might want something concrete to disprove something Thor posted when being so dismissive

Although, Thor you didn't really post anything to back up your assertions either..

Phantom · 04-08-2008, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

So no facts, but a feeling?

Might want something concrete to disprove something Thor posted when being so dismissive

Although, Thor you didn't really post anything to back up your assertions either..

Facts aren't a part of this discussion. Here we're discussing characterizations of events none of us witnessed in person.

I grew up around generals. They take their job and their integrity very seriously. To even imply that a general would go to Congress and lie to mislead people (whether under oath or not) is a pretty enormous accusation that I would want some solid facts to back up, not characterizations by journalists.

I understand not everyone feels this way, but IMO a little more respect is due.

motivez · 04-08-2008, 03:36 PM

I think he lost this de-facto respect when he went before Congress a few times ago and completely politicized his responses, went around making radio addresses to help bolster the Republicans political positions, etc.

He's become a political hack, allowing himself to be used for partisan political purposes.

Yeah he's still a sitting General, and

for his service to the country, but that doesn't mean he gets a free pass on his bullshit.

goldenponderbob · 04-08-2008, 03:38 PM

Petraeus isn't bipartisan, his constituency is contained within that five-sided monster that expanded our simple objective of defeating the Taliban in Afganistan back in October, 01', by whispering words of "Mid-East Miracles" and "Perpetual Peace Hero" into the ears of our Comander-In-Chief (kind of a revamped "war to end all wars" thing, I'd have bet.

Don't blame this on McCain. That General would be saying what he's bound to say regardless who the GOP nominated. And, don't blame the GOP, they are behaving exactly as they should, that is, they are following their misguided leader. Blame the folks who allowed the 04' referendum to hinge on Kerry's Vietnam record vs. Bush's National Guard record instead of the issue at hand. Bush won the popular vote and continued to do take advice from the Pentagon, what else would we expect him to do?

In 06' the war weary country finally turned control of the war over to Nancy & the democrats. Congress still has the power to kill the funding that fuels the war. She is not bound to follow the Commander-In-Chief or take advice from the Pentagon. Her party is in charge. They are free to disregard Petraeus' entire accessment; which is what we expect them to do; thats what we elected them to do. We shouldn't have to put with a "GOP War Plan after we took control of congress away from them.

Yet that is pretty much what's gong on.

Why am I not even hearing much from Cindy these days . . .Hmmmmmm?

Phantom · 04-08-2008, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Yeah he's still a sitting General, and for his service to the country, but that doesn't mean he gets a free pass on his bullshit.

I'm not saying give him a free pass, but there's a large gap between lying, and acting as a political hack.

Donkey® · 04-08-2008, 03:56 PM

I am glad that Hillary's "lies" on certain events in Bosnia or Obama's preacher gets more hostility and condemnation than the bullshit coming out of this guy's mouth. Makes sense.