The Gen. Petraeus and Amb. Crocker Hearings and What the Surge in Fact Proves

Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

• Share
• Print View
• Comments

General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker are testifying this week that the "surge" has worked. They claim that violent incidents have decreased and that progress towards victory in Iraq has been made.

When you look at the surge in purely military terms, it has reduced violence. Our men and women in uniform have done what they have been asked to do. On the battlefield they have no equal.

But the surge proves that there is no military solution to Iraq. Our military cannot guarantee Iraqi economic progress or government efficacy. Look at the facts -- oil production remains below prewar levels, electricity in Baghdad remains below prewar levels, unemployment is as high as 50 percent in certain areas, and the Iraqi Government refuses to take the political steps necessary for national reconciliation.

We must not be fooled by those who say there will be chaos if we leave Iraq. The leaders of the Iraqi factions can choose whether or not there will be chaos in Iraq. Prime Minister Maliki, Moqtada al Sadr, President Talabani, and Vice-President Hashimi -- they control the forces. In fact, it is widely understood that Moqtada al Sadr's call to his Mahdi militia for a cease fire has been critical to the reduction of violence.

The more U.S. troops we send to Iraq, the more dependent the Iraqis become on U.S. Forces. The longer our troops are there, the less likely it is that the Iraqi security forces and police will take the lead in securing and stabilizing their own country.

Simply put: Why, after five years, $535 billion, over 4,000 American lives lost and nearly 30,000 wounded, can't the Iraqi government control their own country?

The answer: Because they won't, as long as we are there. That is what the surge in fact proves.

Comments

[desthmoneses]

Didn't Murhthat say the surge was working at some point? I may be wrong but I think he did.

[rivrgrrl]

Rep. Murtha

Cut the funding and end this occupation.

[Not Blind]

Dear Representative Murtha,
You're preaching to the choir here. U.N. weapons inspectors weren't finished, but Bush claimed there were WMD's there anyway, and led us into Iraq. Condi Rice and Cheney kept up the rhetoric about nuclear weapons capabilities, while Ambassador Joe Wilson found and refused to fabricate evidence to support their claims, for which in retaliation his wife was outed and lost her job in the CIA. Al-Qaeda was never in Iraq, as Saddam Hussein was their bitter enemy.
We were supposed to get rid of a tyrant-dictator, but Congress (our elected representatives in government) have enabled this president to become one. You talk about political reconciliation amongst Iraqis, yet this administration has polarized this nation, divided and threatened or bribed telecoms into violating Constitutional law, enacted policies of torture, illegal detention, suspension of due process, and the rendition of American citizens and residents.
Instead of writing in this paper, why don't those decent representatives (if there are any left), not blinded by political loyalty, self-serving expediency, or greed, begin impeachment hearings for Cheney, Rice, Gonzalez and the rest? Their actions are criminal! They've committed perjury, treason, obstructed justice (destroying evidence), conspired to commit torture. Nazi war criminals were hung for less than this.

[sleepless]

P.S. If you could pass one law, make it this: War Profititeering Is Illegal.

See how fast this all stops.

[sleepless]

Sir,

We know this already. We know.

So stop it. Stop the funding.

STOP THE FUNDING.

[Zenobius]

The problem is that whether or not the surge has worked depends on what you wanted from it

If your objective was to reduce the level of violence enough to get Iraq off the front pages, make it possible for the strategy of confrontation with Iran to continue, and give the Republican candidate a chance to win the next election, the surge has clearly worked.

If your objective was to win the war, setting up a stable and independent Iraq, the surge has clearly not worked. Iraq still has a lot of factions. Those factions are heavily armed. They all seem to be expecting a civil war, which means that all hell is likely to break loose if we start withdrawing troops. The people who say the surge is working don't advocate troop reductions in Iraq The war is still costing the US heavily, in a lot of ways well understood by Huffington Post readers and military people responsible for dealing with other threats.

Bush has gotten on the tiger, and thanks to the surge, managed to stay on He has not come close to figuring out how to dismount. The tiger is getting hungrier. I don't envy the next President.

[gwpriester]

What is really scary about all this is the White House and the Pentagon continue to vilify Iran. One gets the distinct impression that not having learned the lessons of Iraq, never mind Viet Nam, that the only way out of this insane mess Mr. Bush has gotten us in, the Congress, the Pentagon, and the White House think the solution is to start a new war.

Every member of the House and the Senate should be ashamed at themselves. They have let Bush and Cheney walk all over them. And they even act as if they are proud to be door mats.

If congress had any self respect and respect for the image of the United States, the rule of law and the Constitution, they would all resign en mass and let someone else who has the sense and the guts to get out of Iraq take over.

[realpolitic]

Yes, the Iraqi government can learn more easily from making their own mistakes, then from ours. It is time to let them make their own mistakes. They will clean them up and move on. The sectarian divisions will be addressed as the country grows more confident then it is now.

[RTOTrainer]

"Simply put: Why, after five years, $535 billion, over 4,000 American lives lost and nearly 30,000 wounded, can't the Iraqi government control their own country? "

Because no new government in recorded history has managed to do that in less than 20 years.

The unreasonable expectations have got to go.

[The Impartial]

20 years? You are WRONG, DEAD WRONG there!
Look at Germany after the Second World War. Eisenhower did it in less than 10 years with the help of allied forces and the Marshall Plan.

[RTOTrainer]

I'd argue that the partition of Germany constitutes a hinderance to that national rebuilding. Even so, the UN didn't accept admission of East and West Germany until 1970 which requires that a nation be willing and able to fulfill it's committments under the UN Charter prior to joining.

Can't use that as a test for Iraq (or Afghanistan) as both nations were already members.

But if you wish to consider West Germany separately;

We moved more slowly with Germany as well. It was 5 years before they were allowed to form their own government. WIth Iraq it was half that.

It was another 5 years before the FRG declared it's sovreignty. It was not until then that they begna rearmament, which I consider a requisite, that a nation be able to defend itself. From that point it takes 15 years just to develop a Company 1st Sergeant or a Brigade commander, never mind the logistical base and procurement measures to sustain operations.

[bronceye]

The purpose of the surge was to prolong the war until bush leaves. The surge has succeeded, as long as congress gives up the money. Now, you do your thing, sir. Talk's cheap.

[Kungfublood]

there will be chaos if we leave Iraq in the hands of oil companies that have a reason to keep it destabilised in order to continue stealing oil every day.

[The Impartial]

Not only stealing oil every day but stealing people's money by fixing the price of crude.

[JBS]

They're not stealing the oil from Iraq. That's for later.

Right now they're suppressing the production as an excuse to keep prices artificially high.

[RTOTrainer]

Funny, the oil procdution of Iraq reached pre-war levels last December and continue to rise.

[rroy]

Oh what a tangled web we weave,when first we practice to deceive!
One hears meaning less phrases like,Victory,Iraqi Democracy,Weapons of Mass Destruction,Don'yt Cut and Run,Smoking Gun,Iranian Threat to Middle East Stability,and on and on!
Yet no one has come up with a plan or program that does not end up with more bloodshed and violence in the area,or has any certainty of success.In fact I don't recall hearing of any possible action that will not result in additional chaos,and that is for one simple reason;the reason being we tragicly,deviously, and mistakingly have created a situation of chaos!
And if this were not bad enough,before we participated in actions that brought about this chaotic eruption,we laid part of the groundwork for it by aiding and abetting the intrusion into the area of Zionists from Europe and the American Continents,while turning a blind eye to their excesses.

Leaving will result in chaos?That sounds like the guy standing before a firing squad,when asked if he had any last words launched into a tirade against the dictator who ordered his execution.The leader of the firing squad told him,"you better shut your mouth or you're gonna get into trouble".

[opines]

American voters by a wide margin turned thyumbs-down on 'Stay the Course' in the 2006 Congressional elections. They thought that they had instructed their representatives to begin the'"Out of Iraq' withdrawal process.

Instead, Congress permitted 'the Surge', which was presented as a short=term, last ditch effort to give the Iraqi Parliament and Army a chance to show an ability to handle things on their own.

Cut to the present, Petraeus and Crocker explain to feckless Congressional interrogators that we must press on if we are to retain the progress gained by the Surge, or in the alternative, we must press on because the Surge still needs more time to achieve its objectives.

If further inconclusive progress is attained then we would have to remain in Iraq to assure that such progress is not squandered. If ground is lost, we must continue on because we cannot afford to appear defeated in this central battlefield in the 'war on terror'.

And thus, 'Stay the Course' triumphed over the will of the American electorate.

[mamacat]

"WMDs in Iraq will be used against the U.S. if we don't invade.
Iraq will fall apart and there will be genocide if we remove the troops that were supposed to find the WMDs.
Iran is the reason that the Iraqis are fighting and killing our troops."

"There is a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, cheap!"
"McCain is a straight talking maverick!"

[HamletsMill]

mamacat,

That bridge has already been sold to the American people a thousand times now. Many people have a xeroxed deed in their wallets.

[jubo]

Indeed Sir, whether the US pulls out in five months or five decades there will be a sectarian bloodbath. Alea jacta est, said Caesar, the die has been cast.