PDA

View Full Version : Petraeus: Iraqis Not Making "Sufficient Progress"


jAZ
03-13-2008, 11:34 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031303793.html?hpid=topnews

Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'

By Cameron W. Barr
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 14, 2008; Page A10

BAGHDAD, March 13 -- Iraqi leaders have failed to take advantage of a reduction in violence to make adequate progress toward resolving their political differences, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Thursday.

Petraeus, who is preparing to testify to Congress next month on the Iraq war, said in an interview that "no one" in the U.S. and Iraqi governments "feels that there has been sufficient progress by any means in the area of national reconciliation," or in the provision of basic public services.

The general's comments appeared to be his sternest to date on Iraqis' failure to achieve political reconciliation. In February, following the passage of laws on the budget, provincial elections and an amnesty for certain detainees, Petraeus was more encouraging. "The passage of the three laws today showed that the Iraqi leaders are now taking advantage of the opportunity that coalition and Iraqi troopers fought so hard to provide," he said at the time.

Petraeus came back to Iraq a year ago to implement a counterinsurgency strategy, backed up by a temporary increase of about 30,000 U.S. troops, intended to reduce violence so Iraqi leaders could pass laws and take other measures to ease the sectarian and political differences that threaten to break the country apart.

The Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has won passage of some legislation that aids the cause of reconciliation, drawing praise from President Bush and his supporters. But the Iraqi government also has deferred action on some of its most important legislative goals, including laws governing the exploitation of Iraq's oil resources, that the Bush administration had identified as necessary benchmarks of progress toward reconciliation.

chiefforlife
03-14-2008, 12:02 AM
Im not surprised.

Logical
03-14-2008, 12:13 AM
What do you want to bet he has reconsidered after the admin advises him before he testifies?

patteeu
03-14-2008, 09:27 AM
What do you want to bet he has reconsidered after the admin advises him before he testifies?

What do you want to bet that you've exaggerated the importance of this comment with respect to how negative Petraeus' overall assessment of the situation in Iraq is in your own mind?

BucEyedPea
03-14-2008, 09:34 AM
What do you want to bet that you've exaggerated the importance of this comment with respect to how negative Petraeus' overall assessment of the situation in Iraq is in your own mind?

Evaluation of importances is a subjective thing though.

Amnorix
03-14-2008, 09:55 AM
These week to week or month to month assessments aren't really all that insightful. Ultimately, it's going to be 5-10 years, and post-US withdrawal, before we know if Iraq is able to survive as an independent, stable and moderate regional power in the Middle East.

Given the country's history and demographics, I have rather extreme doubts. I've posted about this many times before, and I hope I'm wrong, but I think civil war is by far the more likely path -- including possibly partial or total absorption or domination by Iran.

Amnorix
03-14-2008, 09:57 AM
Following on my last post -- do Pat and others on the right think that long term American military occupation -- say 10+ years, at the cost of a billion dollars a month or more, to be either wise, sustainable or politically acceptable, if the consequences of withdrawal are either civil war within Iraq, or domination/absorption by Iran?

I guess I'd choke on it but I'm not sure I'd be willing to let the alternatives come to fruition. Indefinite occupation is very, very bad for us.

Radar Chief
03-14-2008, 10:28 AM
Indefinite occupation is very, very bad for us.

Exactly. Bring our troops home from Europe now! :cuss:
Oh wait, you were talking about something else. ;)

Amnorix
03-14-2008, 10:37 AM
Exactly. Bring our troops home from Europe now! :cuss:
Oh wait, you were talking about something else. ;)

:)

Yes, just to be clear -- though I"m sure you know this -- that's just foreign basing and I'm talking about military occupation. Not nearly the same thing.

jettio
03-14-2008, 10:38 AM
I am against American imperialism per se, but this is getting to the point where we ought to steal all of that f*ckin' Iraqi petroleum.

I read something today where they discovered even more oil deposits, might have been in Kurdistan, probably going to be harder to steal it from them unless we get the Turks to help.

patteeu
03-14-2008, 10:44 AM
Evaluation of importances is a subjective thing though.

True, but Petraeus gets to decide what *he* thinks is important. When Petraeus testifies on this subject to Congress, it may well be that he will remain consistent with this snapshot captured of his current thoughts, but a person like Ill-Logical will see it as a nefarious reconsideration because he failed to understand the degree of importance that Petraeus puts on this particular aspect of the big picture.

BucEyedPea
03-14-2008, 10:46 AM
True, but Petraeus gets to decide what *he* thinks is important. When Petraeus testifies on this subject to Congress, it may well be that he will remain consistent with this snapshot captured of his current thoughts, but a person like Ill-Logical will see it as a nefarious reconsideration because he failed to understand the degree of importance that Petraeus puts on this particular aspect of the big picture.

And we're free to reject it based on everything else that has gone down on the watch of this administration which isn't a good track record. Afterall, Fallon even called Petraeus a "kiss-ass." A man who isn't exactly unpatriotic or afraid to defend this country.

Bowser
03-14-2008, 10:49 AM
I am against American imperialism per se, but this is getting to the point where we ought to steal all of that f*ckin' Iraqi petroleum.

I read something today where they discovered even more oil deposits, might have been in Kurdistan, probably going to be harder to steal it from them unless we get the Turks to help.

*perk*

New OIL??

Logical
03-14-2008, 10:50 AM
Following on my last post -- do Pat and others on the right think that long term American military occupation -- say 10+ years, at the cost of a billion dollars a month or more, to be either wise, sustainable or politically acceptable, if the consequences of withdrawal are either civil war within Iraq, or domination/absorption by Iran?

I guess I'd choke on it but I'm not sure I'd be willing to let the alternatives come to fruition. Indefinite occupation is very, very bad for us.

Great qustion you should make this a thread topic.

Logical
03-14-2008, 10:51 AM
And we're free to reject it based on everything else that has gone down on the watch of this administration which isn't a good track record. Afterall, Fallon even called Petraeus a "kiss-ass." A man who isn't exactly unpatriotic or afraid to defend this country.
:clap::clap::clap:

patteeu
03-14-2008, 10:55 AM
Following on my last post -- do Pat and others on the right think that long term American military occupation -- say 10+ years, at the cost of a billion dollars a month or more, to be either wise, sustainable or politically acceptable, if the consequences of withdrawal are either civil war within Iraq, or domination/absorption by Iran?

I guess I'd choke on it but I'm not sure I'd be willing to let the alternatives come to fruition. Indefinite occupation is very, very bad for us.

First of all, we won't stay 10+ years at the level of commitment that we currently have so it's an academic question. If we believed that at the end of 10 years of this level of commitment that we'd come out with the kind of self-sustaining Iraq that we want, I think it would be worth it. If we thought Iraq was going to collapse as soon as we leave no matter how long we stay, then we might as well leave now (unless buying ourselves some time serves some other purpose). The difficult question for me would be the space between those two endpoints. For example, do we stay up to 10 years if the chances are 50/50? It's hard for me to answer that question because I'm not enough of an expert on (a) how much strain it puts on our military to stay, (b) what other threats are emerging that we need to prepare for, (c) how much of a drag on our economy the expeditures represent. I do believe that retreat will do a lot of harm to our ability wage war (or perhaps more importantly wield the credible threat of force as a diplomatic tool) even if I can't quantify it. I'm sorry I can't give you a definite answer, but this is the closest I can get to addressing your question directly.

patteeu
03-14-2008, 10:56 AM
And we're free to reject it based on everything else that has gone down on the watch of this administration which isn't a good track record. Afterall, Fallon even called Petraeus a "kiss-ass." A man who isn't exactly unpatriotic or afraid to defend this country.

Of course, you can reject whatever you want. But that is a different topic. You can reject it, but it would be unfair to smear General Petraeus as a man who yeilds to the pressure of the WH if it isn't true.

BucEyedPea
03-14-2008, 11:11 AM
Of course, you can reject whatever you want. But that is a different topic. You can reject it, but it would be unfair to smear General Petraeus as a man who yeilds to the pressure of the WH if it isn't true.

I'm just being the messenger. It's what Fallon said about Petraeus. It's his opinion. I think he's in closer proximity to the situation to have one.

Radar Chief
03-14-2008, 11:26 AM
I'm just being the messenger. It's what Fallon said about Petraeus. It's his opinion. I think he's in closer proximity to the situation to have one.

Iíve never met a general, or officer above captain for that matter, that had much of anything good to say about other officers that werenít under their command.
Tends to make me wonder what other officers say about Fallon. :hmmm:

RINGLEADER
03-14-2008, 10:35 PM
Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'

Wow. That's an understatement.

BucEyedPea
03-14-2008, 10:53 PM
I'd like to know admirals Radar's met?
And weren't you in the army?