The Senators Grill Petraeus; My Brother Messages Me From Iraq

Just as yesterday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Iraq was winding down, I received an IM from my 24-year-old brother, Sam, a soldier currently serving in Iraq.

ME: hey! i'm at the senate right now, listening to gen petraeus!
SAM: Sweet!
SAM: How is it??
ME: fascinating
ME: and incredibly dull at the same time
SAM: [My wife] and I are very interested in which questions the presidentila candidates asked
SAM: For the insight into their priorities/understanding of defense

Sam's not alone. Judging from the celebrity reception Obama received at the afternoon's hearing, everybody wants to know what questions the presidential candidates are asking, looking to parse their positions, because, of course, one of the candidates will be inheriting the mess that is this war.

Yet Sam bristled at the thought of the general being grilled by a roomful of senators.

SAM: As we've said already, it's a complex issue and I don't think any Senate hearing can really do justice to it
SAM: In my experience, unless you have SERIOUSLY good reason, you should always defer to the judgment of the commander on the ground
SAM: In this case, General Petraeus is a caring, competent, and intelligent commander whose strategies and ideas are vastly improving the security situation. I don't see why the Senate committee should feel like they would be able to make better decisions or recommendations than he is already providing

Sam's concerns reflect the tensions between political authority and military authority that have been roiling beneath discussions of Iraq since the beginning. At first, it was "Who's in charge?" Meaning the White House or the Pentagon? Rumsfeld or the generals?

Increasingly, it's "What's the goal?" Is it a political or a military one? Are we staying in Iraq to foster a stable government or to contain an enemy? And if the latter, which enemy?

SAM: The true issue here is defining success - what are the measures being used?
SAM: It's impossible for anyone to be successful with a project or task if they don't know what goals they are trying to achieve
SAM: If the goals are strictly political (ie, unfuck the Iraqi government), then the amount of resources dedicated to that effort are woefully inadequate
SAM: If the goals are strictly security based (ie, neutralize the insurgency's ability to fight effectively), then we are well on our way and I think that the Counterinsurgency strategy that General Petraeus has spearheaded is incredibly effective

Remarkably, given how far away he was from yesterday's Senate meeting-- or perhaps not remarkable at all, given that he is trying to implement the decisions of the very people in that room-- the question plaguing Sam is the question the senators were asking, which is the question the country wants answered, which is the question the president has somehow failed for five years to answer: What are we doing there?

And, beyond that, an even bigger question: Who gets to decide? On the front, the military and the politicians are dug deep into their own tug of war. General Petraeus is saying we can keep making small gains toward peace and security if only we have more time, money, resources, and soldiers. And the politicians are saying we are all tapped out -- even Petraeus acknowledged that occasionally the US must "sometimes show we have emotions other than endless patience."

Meantime, all of us continue to cope with the day-to-day (and dollar-to-dollar) realities of the war. For Sam, that means patrolling the streets in an armored vehicle, living next to a landfill that is routinely set on fire and enduring the effects of downing too much chai tea with the local Sheikh. In the middle of our chat he disappeared abruptly, and I felt the wave of anxiety that will be familiar to all of us who have skin in this game.

A few minutes later he returned.

SAM: Sorry about that.
ME: it's ok your'e at war
SAM: True. At the moment, with my colon
ME: lol
SAM: Today, the colon is winning

Comments

[vallon]

For more on the Petraeus and Crocker show, read Dick Cavett's blog:


http://tinyurl.com/63v699

[mjc]

Think it is so very fundamental to ask why are we there, or maybe it should go why are we still there? The latter could have been asked early in 2004 actually. But guys fight there, in Iraq or Afghanistan, assume there is a good reason, usually associated with "keeping terrorism from coming to our shores" or "to establish a stable democracy". Again, Petraeus and Crocker seem to like the stable democracy answer though why in hell we are supposed to be doing that there beats me. And the conditions will never be exactly the sort that will further that. So we are now the British Empire, we have taken up the white man's burden, and we are occupying the Middle East with the help of our dear allies....who weren't there for the Brits, the Israelis. But most soldiers, and my brother is certainly one of these, don't think the civilians should be asking questions of THE GENERAL or crocker. But at least you are talking to your brother about this. Only can raise a small portion of questions such as you have raised with my own brother, now retired but still anxious to win a war for this country,.

[MoeJava]

As secretive and nasty as the Bush administration is, I am shocked they haven't disabled all IMs from the Troops - so they couldnt possibly find out whats happeneing. They'd rather the Troops be obedient. compliant and unaware.

[ErikW65]

Sam asked "What are we doing there?"

Nuremburg Principle number six:
Principle VI
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances.

United Nations Charter, Article 2,
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Further,
Principle IV
The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Peace.

[kmdippenger]

I'd like to hear more from the people who are in Iraq doing the hard work. We've been lied to so often, who can we believe?

[tdpubs]

If we can't seem to understand that over 70% of the people in Iraq want us out, that the Iraqi goventment want us to begin withdrawing, that the people we are paying off to stop killing our troops would rather have jobs and their own country back, then we are as blind as our president.
u pluribus unum

[jwinterstein]

I'm not sure where you get this 70% number. Here's a link with some recent polling data from a ABC/BBC poll of Iraqis (look at page 4): http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1060a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdf
According to the poll only 38% of Iraqis want the US troops to leave. Even this past August only 47% of Iraqis wanted the troops to leave. 49% of Iraqis think the invasion was right.

Generally the polling data show increased positive views of the troop presence and prospects for the future of Iraq.

Perhaps this explains why we can't understand that over 70% of the people in Iraq want us out.

On a different topic, I think you meant "E pluribus unum."

[NotMyPrez]

At least it didn't end with a semi-colon.

[josephjsalas]

Is Petraeus falling victim to a Foreign Policy making Senate?

[jmaycock]

Here's is some advise for Sam. If you are plagued by the question of "What are we doing there?", and you are actually there carrying out the so called mission, there is something seriously wrong. And you shouldn't have to wait for the next president to arrive in order to come to the logical conclusion that "You shouldn't be there". Why don't you think for yourself, quit the army and become a real hero.

[VivaZapata]

this article ended shittily

[hubbstan]

It seems to me the soldier currently serving in Iraq nailed the most important questions to ask which is exactly what Obama did. No wonder many are impressed yet again with Obama's ability to deal with complex problems head-on.

[JohnCochtosten]

WELL DONE

[Ping]

Funny.