Questions for General Petraeus and General Odierno

Confirmation hearings tomorrow for Gen. Petraeus and Gen. Odierno will allow us an opportunity to focus on Iraq as well as how the war broadly impacts other critical national security questions: Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and the strain on the military.

In previous hearings, when he was leading our forces in Iraq, General Petraeus deferred on these questions, stating that the topics were outside of his purview. But now that he is being nominated for CENTCOM Commander - and will likely be in charge of commanding any U.S. military operations from the Horn of Africa to the Middle East to Central Asia - he must address larger strategic questions.

Below are the questions I believe both Gen. Petraeus and Gen. Odierno need to address in order for the American people to gain a better sense of what their, and the administration's, greater strategic plans are for America's security:

QUESTIONS FOR GENERAL PETRAEUS

Iran

Question 1: President Bush last week described negotiating with Iran as equivalent to Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler. Yet last month Ambassador Ryan Crocker said, "we are willing to sit down with Iran, face to face, for talks on Iraqi security at the invitation of the Iraqi government. We've had three rounds of those talks and we've told them we are ready to again." Also, last week Secretary of Defense Gates said "My own view, just my personal view, would be we ought to look for ways outside of government to open up the channels and get more of a flow of people back and forth." What do you make of these apparently contradictory views? Do you agree with President Bush or with Secretary Gates and Ambassador Crocker? Would you support a strategy of engaging with the Iranian government.? [ABC News, 4/08/08, Reuters, 5/16/08]

Question 2: As part of your strategy in Iraq you have supported engaging in direct talks with former Sunni insurgents who used to attack American forces. You have also supported carefully engaging Muqtada Al Sadr and made complementary statements about him in the press in an attempt to maintain his ceasefire and encourage him to engage in Iraqi politics. Given that your strategy in Iraq has been largely based on talking to our enemies would you support continuing to talk to Iran about Iraq and expanding the dialogue to other subjects such as Afghanistan and naval tensions in the Persian Gulf? [AFP, 5/01/08]

Afghanistan / Pakistan

Questions 3: The nation's 16 intelligence agencies stated that the most direct threat to the U.S. homeland is actually from the borderland between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Do you agree and if not, why not? How will you work to change our posture globally within CENTCOM to put primary attention on this immediate threat?

Question 4: Admiral Mullen has said that "In Afghanistan we do what we can. In Iraq we do what we must." Moreover, according to news sources, commanders on the ground indicate that an additional 10,000-12,000 troops are needed. Do you agree that more troops are needed in Afghanistan and, if so, how many? Are operations in Iraq an obstacle to increasing our troop levels in Afghanistan? [USA Today, 11/12/07, WSJ, 5/06/08]

Question 5: The GAO released a report last month titled: The United States Lacks a Comprehensive Plan to Destroy the Terrorist Threat and Close the Safe Haven in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas. The report concluded that the United States "has not met its national security goals to destroy the terrorist threat" and that there is "No comprehensive plan for meeting U.S. national security goals" in the tribal regions of Pakistan. Do you agree with this assessment? What strategies will you employ to better work with the Pakistani government and its military to thwart the Al Qaeda threat emanating from the tribal regions of Pakistan? [GAO, 4/17/08]

Question 6: Pentagon officials have recently said that the military stands ready to help assist Pakistan in reorienting its army for counterinsurgency efforts; the Pentagon's top official for special operations has suggested that U.S. special operations or even conventional forces could become involved in joint operations with Pakistani troops in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in a "low visibility manner." Other Pentagon officials have talked about transferring the lessons from working with tribal groups in Iraq to Pakistan. Do you think that there are aspects of the approaches used in Iraq that could be used in Pakistan? If so, which ones and how?

Question 7: Officials in Pakistan's new democratically-elected government have held discussions with leaders of various militant groups in an attempt to strike a deal and reduce violence. The new government also reportedly struck a deal with them that led to the release of the Pakistani ambassador to Afghanistan. Some have compared these deals and potential deals to the agreements struck on Waziristan in 2006 by Musharraf - which helped lead to the safe havens that are part of the problem today. How would you see these negotiations as Commander of CENTCOM? How will you deal with the government of Pakistan regarding these negotiations?

Somalia

Question 8: I'm very concerned about the Islamist insurgency in Somalia. Somalia has reemerged as a terrorist haven, piracy is increasing off the Somali coast, and the current food crisis and drought in the region create a highly unstable situation of growing concern to U.S. security. The U.S. military is clearly aware of this situation and has conducted numerous air strikes against terrorist targets in Somalia. What is your approach to address this growing problem in Somalia and how does it fit in with broader U.S. policy toward Somalia, the Horn of Africa region, terrorism, failed states, and ungoverned territories? Could you also please elaborate on how CENTCOM plans to coordinate the handing off of responsibility for this region to AFRICOM?

Strains on the Military

Question 9: We have heard a lot about the strains of our deployments in Iraq, particularly with regard to the surge, with the Army saying that more than 25% of soldiers on 3rd or 4th tours suffer mental health problems and the Army's Vice Chief of Staff, General Cody saying the surge "took all the stroke out of the shock absorbers for the United States Army." Adding that "Our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it...testing the resolve of our all-volunteer force like never before." What do we need to do to reduce those strains on the soldiers and Marines under your command? What impact do these strains have on our ability to respond to contingencies in CENTCOM? [Washington Post, 4/02/08]

QUESTIONS FOR GENERAL ODIERNO

Iraq

Question 1: Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen have indicated that the current pause in the drawdown of U.S. troops will be brief and that more troops will begin to depart Iraq relatively soon. However, General Petraeus and President Bush have both indicated that the pause in troop withdrawals will be indefinite. And this week there are reports that new troop rotations into Iraq will ensure that there will be 140,000 troops in Iraq through the end of 2008. How long do you envision the pause will last? Do the new troop rotations guarantee that there will be 140,000 troops in Iraq as of the end of 2008? How many forces do you plan to have in Iraq for the Iraqi provincial election in October; will we need a temporary increase? Under what conditions do you think we could further reduce troop levels in Iraq? [Washington Post, 5/20/08. Washington Post, 4/11/08]

Question 2: General Petraeus told CBS News a couple of months ago that the inability to find jobs and integration for Sunnis was the thing above all else that keeps him up at night. How do you define success in terms of measuring what the Iraqi central government needs to be doing on this front? Have you set specific benchmarks? Has the Iraqi government been meeting those measures and integrating the Sunni groups into Iraqi security forces or giving them other work?

Question 3: Assuming a decision by the president, in your professional estimation, how long would a responsible withdrawal from Iraq take?

Comments

[RossalGondamer]

What will you two do with all your free time under the next administration?

[wayoutleft]

one good question: "how should we hold the rubber stamp so it imprints right side up?"

[deke33]

Other questions. What does he think about those military personnel who were fired or resigned because they did not agree or publicly spoke out against an administration's policy. Were they brave, patriotic Americans who called it as they saw it. What does he think of the military leaders who went along with this policy? What does he think of the use of torture by the CIA and agencies like Blackwater? What does he think of Blackwater as an independent, mercenary force instead of the usual armies used to fight wars? What does he think of military officers who think nothing of falsifying records as they did in the Tillman case? The officer schools that repeatedly speak of honor, honesty, humility, fairness and bravery in the face of the enemy.

[ResidentChimp]

Questions for the surrender monkeys. Is their any cause you would be willing to fight for? Are there any enemies of America that you wouldn't be willing to appease? Are there any allies you would be willing not to stab in the back? Will you ever be able to stop waving the white flag? will you ever be willing to treat all Americans equally? Will you ever be able to accept responsibility for your actions.

[deke33]

Yes. But the cause must be just. Tell me what justification did we have to invade Iraq? All the reasons given by this administration have changed as each and everyone was refuted. No nukes in 6 months, no wmds, no meeting with AQ, not one Iraqi part of the 9/11 terrorists group, Iraqis will strew flowers in our path, the invasion will be a cakewalk, a cakewalk that will only cost 60 billion, Iraqi oil will pay for the war, bringing democracy to Iraq as we tried to establish Chalabi as its leader (reminiscent of the 2000 election in Fla.), Saddam was a bad leader, ( 80% of Americans, let alone the rest of the world, think Bush is a bad leader, then you would not mind if a "coalition of the willing" attacked us to remove this bad leader). I will stop here so as to not embarass your powers of cogent thinking with one more question. Could you please explain to the American public why Bush attacked Iraq who had no terrorists on the 9/11 planes, did not finance it nor made the plans for it, instead of Saudi Arabia where Bush Sr. was financially tied to the Bin Laden family, where Osama is a member of that family, the Saudis financed the 9/11 operation, and 15 of the 9/11 hijackers were weaned? Did Bush think that attacking Iraq would punish the Saudis for their participation for 9/11. Do your best.

[GPRogueCowboy]

Approximately how many Al Qaida Terrorists were in Iraq when you assumed Command?
Approximately how many Al Qaida Terrorists have been Captured since assumed Command?
Approximately how many Al Qaida Terrorists have been Killed since assumed Command?

Were you in charge of training any of those that fled their Posts?
Do I have the Allied and Iraqi numbers correct?
160,000 Allied Forces
430,000 Iraqi Security Forces
70,000 Iraqi Awakening Forces
For a total of 660,000 charged with maintaining the peace and defeating Al Qaida.
How long will it take the 660,000 to DEFEAT the less than 6000 Al Qaida Terrorists?
How many more Billions of Taxpayer dollars will it take to DEFEAT the less than 6000 Al Quida Terrorists?
How many more American lives will it take to DEFEAT the less than 6000 Al Quida Terrorists?
How many more American wounded warriors will it take to DEFEAT the less than 6000 Al Qaida Terrorists?

According to Top Generals in Iraq
"Al-Qaida in Iraq, which did not exist as a coherent group before U.S.
troops invaded in March 2003, probably now numbers no more than 6,000,
according to U.S. intelligence estimates. It may have been closer to
10,000-strong before the severe pummeling it took last year.

Are we there to Kill or Capture Al Qaeda Terrorists or are we there to fight CIVIL WARS of Shiites against Shiites, Sons of Iraq against everyone and Sunni against Shiites? Will there only be one group when we "WIN"?

[brainuser]

Now Olmert wants US to blockade Iran. Good idea?

[sophistwatch]

If you thought they were cherry picking and using window dressings before, wait until you see the sunshine they try to pump up our asses tomorrow. This is an election year and McCain needs all the help he can get. This will likely be an over the top distortion of reality because McCain is running on the GW platform. If GP and GO do not make it look really good, they will weaken McCain's argument for being strong on defense.

On the other hand, we can hope that a few Democrats and Chuck Hagel do some nut thumping to set the tone for what is to come when Bush is gone. It is possible that some serious grandstanding could come from the left because it is an election year.

Maybe we will get lucky and some truth will accidentally slip out.

[brainuser]

"I fired him [MacArthur] because he wouldn't respect the authority of the President. I didn't fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail" -- Harry S Truman

[kavan]

Well, questions like that may well be asked, but I doubt any unobfuscated responses would be forthcoming from either general.

[CitizenLegislatorCC]

"You have also supported carefully engaging Muqtada Al Sadr and made complementary statements about him in the press in an attempt to maintain his ceasefire and encourage him to engage in Iraqi politics."

Define "engage in Iraqi politics." Don't you actually mean "engage in so-called Iraqi politics in accordance with the self-serving dictates of the American occupiers." Al Sadr and his followers will engage in Iraqi politics and national self-determination like there's no tomorrow THE INSTANT American forces depart his nation, and cease forcefully repressing the MAJORITY will of the Iraqi people who largely share Al Sadr's views.

My questions for those two professional liars would focus on the so-called rules of engagement for American troops engaged in hostile activity against un-uniformed Iraqi citizens. For the last five years. No fear of that, though, from Carl Levin's Armed Services Protection Racket/Committee.

Five-ten minutes for both asking and answering a member's question(s) is just long enough to be sure that no meaningful follow-up can be pursued by questioners - in effect, this voluntary self-muzzling by Congress continues the long, extraordinarily damaging Republican practice of not holding Congressional oversight hearings at all.

Time for the little boys in Congress to play General again, in sycophantic harmony. If you prefer truth, listen instead to some real men who've experienced Iraq the hard way, street by street:

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=205390-1

[Samnite]

General Patreaus, this week the Israeli papers have reported that during Bush's visit last week in private meetings it was stated he would attack Iran before January. If Bush gives you an order to attack Iran will you disobey it?

[Richard729]

You're dealing with toady generals Odierno and Petraeus so any questions or concerns by the people of our country will be ignored. The marching orders come straight from the Bush mob just as last year when Bush trotted out Petraeus in full uniform to sit before a congressional committee to stonewall congress and give only the answers that career senior officers are expected to do. He was joined by another Bush crony, Ryan Crocker, who helped push through Halliburton's no-bid contract and obscene rip-off of the taxpayers in building the $750 million embassy in Baghdad.

Most of these generals and admirals are but echo chambers and shills for Bush's war policies which have taken our country down the path of economic ruin while they secure comfy jobs on corporate defense contractor boards.

We now know that to be true based on the Pentagon's own Military Analyst, aka propaganda, Program which included even some in the mainstream media like New York Times columnist, Thomas Friedman. All of these generals and admirals will enter the civilian society with lavish lifetime retirement pensions and medical benefits at our nation's best hospitals for themselves and their families, all courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer, most of whom can barely get by paycheck to paycheck.

While they drape themselves with the American flag and immerse themselves in medals, hiding behind the confines of the protected Green Zone, they send the grunts home in flag-draped coffins -- all because of Bush's pack of lies.

[hopeless277]

Gen Pat: I'm sorry but I'm under orders from the president not to answer any questions from the congress.

Gen O: Same goes for me. See ya later.

[Synoia]

Q. And you expect direct answers, and no evasions?

Q. Would you agree that would be for the first time?

[biwee]

Both Petraeus and Odierno are NeoCon warmongers. They should enjoy the next 8-10 months. At that point, President Obama will begin to clean the charnal house, and these Shrub lackeys will go into retirement.