Petraeus And Odierno Confirmed By Senate

WASHINGTON — Notwithstanding months of partisan wrangling in Congress over the Iraq war, the Senate on Thursday handily confirmed Gen. David Petraeus as the top commander in the Middle East and Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno to replace Petraeus as the chief military officer in Iraq.

The Senate voted 95-2 in favor of Petraeus with Democratic Sens. Robert Byrd and Tom Harkin opposing. Harkin, D-Iowa, cast the lone vote opposing Odierno, who was confirmed 96-1.

The Senate action will keep the nation on its present course in Iraq for the remainder of the year. It also will hand the next administration a pair of combat-tested commanders who have relentlessly defended the need to keep troops in Iraq in large numbers, rather than wind down combat operations.

Despite their firm backing of the politically unpopular war, Petraeus and Odierno drew little criticism from congressional Democrats who typically reserve their sharpest critiques for Bush and his political appointees.

"This continuity in U.S. military leadership will be helpful in working with regional and Iraqi political and military leaders," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Byrd, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said he opposed Petraeus in part because the general should see through the operations in Iraq.

Story continues below

advertisement

With security gains being described as fragile, "it does not seem prudent to remove the mastermind behind the fragile successes that have been thus far achieved," said Byrd, D-W.Va.

Harkin spokeswoman Jennifer Mullin said the senator believes that "Petraeus has been an unapologetic supporter of this misguided war in Iraq, continually toeing the administration's party line" while Odierno is guilty of "serious flaws in judgment."

Odierno has "refused to characterize the insurgency that began after the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime as anything that was serious and worthy of a shift in U.S. strategy," Mullin said in a statement.

Last year, Petraeus helped to tame growing opposition to the Iraq war in Congress by providing measured assessments of progress and warning that an exodus of U.S. troops would result in chaos. In the meantime, he advocated a buildup of some 30,000 troops in Baghdad and other hotspots, which eventually proved vital in tamping down violence.

Odierno, as Petraeus' deputy commander in Iraq, is credited with successfully managing the new strategy.

In their new jobs, Odierno will receive a fourth star and report to Petraeus, whose area of responsibility will broaden to include such countries as Iran and Pakistan.

Petraeus would replace Navy Adm. William J. Fallon as chief of U.S. Central Command. Fallon resigned last month following news reports that he was at odds with the White House over Iran policy.

By mid-July, the Pentagon is on track to withdraw the last of the additional combat brigades sent as part of the buildup, leaving behind roughly 142,000 troops. During his nomination hearing in May, Petraeus told Congress that he is likely to recommend more troop reductions this fall.

In other military moves Thursday, President Bush formally nominated Gen. Norton A. Schwartz to be chief of staff of the Air Force. Schwartz, a 35-year veteran with a background in Air Force special operations, would replace Gen. Michael Moseley, who was forced to resign last month in a furor over the service's mishandling of nuclear-related materials.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates recommended Schwartz for the job last month, as he dumped both Moseley and then-Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne. Michael Donley is serving as acting secretary. Both Schwartz and Donley must be confirmed by the Senate.

Bush also nominated Air Force Gen. Duncan McNabb to take over Schwartz' previous post as head of U.S. Transportation Command. McNabb is currently serving as vice chief of staff for the Air Force at the Pentagon. As part of the Air Force leadership shift, Lt. Gen. William Shelton was nominated as chief of the service's warfighting integration.

___

Associated Press Writer Lolita C. Baldor contributed to this report.

Comments

[JennyJay]

Well, it is pretty clear now that the Senate DOES NOT CARE one bit what the American people want.
95 to 2 . . . for the war . . . . People, we pay these Senate knuckleheads, so we can STOP PAYING THEM. . . . We can start voting them out, start cleaning out the rubbish, piece by piece.
Anybody in America, standing on a steet corner, would be a BETTER SENATOR than what we have now. The Senate "ole boys network" is killing America. We need to clean house NOW!

[connorin]

These guys who betray you almost unanimously are the best and brightest of the democrat party? And you plan to re-elect them and more just like them? And you republicans mind numbed robot morons? try taking a good look in the mirror

[riverhouse]

All the good ones in our military leadership have resigned or been fired by the administration. We're left with the dregs and he's it.

[Independent voter]

See - good things do happen when you're a Bush yowza boy.

[springsm]

Ya the uniform and the boatload of ribbons must intimidate those we THOUGHT had better understanding ...we know they have no spine, collectively.

[mediamarv]

What's that brown stuff on Petraeus' nose??

[research]

We can't win a WAR CRIME.

[RGKahn]

I have spent a good portion of this morning on the phone calling every Democratic Senator i have a phone number for and calling the switchboard, 202-225-3121, for those Senators whose number i don't have on my Rolodex. Not one staffer could tell me WHY. Not one Senator had come out with a statement as to WHY. I call Senator Kennedy's office, he had not voted, and according to the person who answered, would probably not voted in favor of the promotion in the chain of command, not a promotion in pay grade. I am appaled as to what this vote means. There are probably three NO VOTES registered, McCain, Kennedy are two of them. What a sad day for the US Senate and the Democratic Party.

[riverhouse]

Harkin and Byrd are the only ones who voted no.

[sharmdun]

General Petraeus is the right man for the job. Dems got it right for a change. Now if they would get of there butts and drill for oil they would be on the right track to at least help the little man in America.

[coloradosiren]

Hogwash on both accounts. This man has not done jacks***, shinola that warrants a damn promotion. As Byrd pointed out, in all of his brilliance, Petraeus is yet to come up with a contingency plan to get us out of Iraq. He is just a Bush lacky. If anything they ought to start stripping him of some of those stars. He is worthless. Byrd and Harkin got it right.

The little man may get some help when they get the first drop of oil in 5-7 years. Surely,you don't think that is going to bring the price down. Let's just sit and wait for it to happen rather than look into long term alternatives that free us from foreign oil dependency, create jobs and clean up the environment.

[RockySoldier]

I'm a life-long hard core democrat. I'm a liberal on most issues. I'm supporting Barack Obama for President. I am also an active soldier. Have you even read about Petraeus' re-writing of the counter-insurgency tactical manual? You spit all sorts of venom over your oh-so-trendy hippie wear and your Bob Dylan mp3s, but you have not offered anything to argue that Petraeus' tactics have worked in Iraq. Violence is down. I opposed the invasion of Iraq and think Bush is the biggest fool we've had in the White House in a long time- it's just too bad that polemic partisan idealogical activists like yourself cannot divorce yourself from your demagoguery for even a moment to enjoy objectivity with regard to a man in uniform. Blah, blah, blah. This man went to war in your stead. Stand up and show some respect!

[Nonamnesiac]

More proof it is not worth voting more Dems into Congress or contirbuting a nickel to their various campaign committees. This war is as much their war, the war crimes are as much Democratic Party war crimes, as it is Bush's war and Bush's war crimes.

95 votes shows it doesn't matter how many Democrats are there, they would vote to continue the war. Let's face it, torturer, executive-power-uber-alles Mukasey is actually the Democrats' choice for Attorney General (confirmed in a Democratically controlled Senate) and expanded FISA infringements on our civil liberties with retroactive immunity for criminal corporations are actually Democratic Party policies (passed in a Democratically-controlled Congress. Bush has a 29% approval rating and couldn't have gotten these through without the Democrats actively pushing for assaulting the Constitution, committing war crimes and immunizing criminality on the part of corporations.

When the numbers on the war budgets (including consciously voting for war crimes), FISA, telecom immunity, etc. are as high as they are, more Democrats will not change hte direction of the country. It'll change the rhetoric of the country, as we learn why they had to fund war crimes, even though they opposed war crimes.

[Graywolf48]

Is this a great country or what? We are always so willing to reward complete incompetence, misfeasance and malfeasance. We as voters do it consistently at the polls every election day and re-elect the same boobs, crooks and liars. We demand to accountability, so why should they when they're called upon to show some judgment? Why shouldn't those who benefit from our disregard for competence or accountability perpetuate the system? The system feed upon itself and that's just fine with the average American voter.

[deke33]

It is mind boggling to never hear the question that should be put before our Generals in Iraq. From Rumsfeldt to Franfs to Abizaid to Petraeus and now to Lt. Gen. Dubek, not once have I heard this, the most important question asked.
" Secretary of Defense or Generals appearing before congressional committees, we train our boys to be sent to Iraq to fight for Iraqi Freedom in less than a year, We have now been training Iraqi security forces and police for over 5 years and yet with each succeeding Sec of Defense and each succeeding General we hear that though the Iraqi security forcees and police are improving but yet not quite ready after 5 years of training. Tell me why should we send our boys with less than one fourth the training of the Iraqi forces there to do what it seems the Iraqi security forces aftyer 5 years of training seem to be never ready to do?

[Vermontah]

A little history, learned from Peter Galbraith's excellent book, "The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End": Petreus, as the war moved through the disasters of 2005 and 2006, I think, was in command in the northern Kurdish region. This region, for years, was the only region in Iraq that was relatively peaceful. When he took overall command, he translated his bottoms-up strategy that worked so well in Kurdistan to Baghdad and the Sunni Triangle.

This has, indeed, worked. Petreus should, honestly, be praised for being the very first American commander with the slightest inkling of how to fight this bizarre war. What has also worked is building huge walls, like in Palestine, to keep ethnic groups apart. Also, millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars given in suitcases to Sunni tribal leaders has induced some insurgents to stop shooting at Americans and start shooting at some of the other foreigners in town, Al-Qaida. These last two methods are questionable at best, and certainly temporary, band-aid remedies that do not address the long-term conflict very much.

Meanwhile, Odierno, according to Galbraith, is a butcher, responsible for much of the pre-Petreus violence in Baghdad. This bodes ill for the situation in Iraq.

[RGKahn]

Upon reading this thia evening at about 7:00 pm Eastern Daylight Savings Time my head exploded. Well maybe not the last part exactly. It felt that it did though. I called a number of Senators whom I had called in the past about their votes etc. I was saddened and disappointed by the cowardice of the Democratic members of the Senate. Even Russ Feingold voted the republican line. There were only two Democratic Senators with the chops to appose these "promotion" Senator Robert Bryd and Senator Tom Harkin. I called those Senators on the West Coast because their field offices were still open so that I might my displeasure known and to ask WHY.?. Gen Petraeus has led his forces in the worst military debacle in American Military History. He is the most political General in the US Army since McAuthur. He is another example of a failure being promoted in spite or because of his failures.

[lornejl1]

The occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan is going so well its time to expand into Iran now.

[Ramirez]

It is good to read that the same Dems who declared the surge a "failure" and the Iraq war "lost" are now voting overwhelmingly to confirm the general in charge.

Democrats and Bush:

In their hearts, they know he's right.