Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 91

Thread: Scrutinizing Petraeus's Record

  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    41

    Default Scrutinizing Petraeus's Record

    I'm actually surprised that something like this hasn't been written earlier, or maybe it has, and I just missed it.

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...eus/index.html

    The appearance on the Hugh Hewitt show probably wasn't a big mistake, if only because the vast majority of americans have no idea who he is. But it clearly gave some people who were looking for a reason to be skeptical of anything Petraeus says that reason.

  2. #2
    Council Member RTK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wherever my stuff is
    Posts
    824

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oblong View Post
    I'm actually surprised that something like this hasn't been written earlier, or maybe it has, and I just missed it.

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...eus/index.html

    The appearance on the Hugh Hewitt show probably wasn't a big mistake, if only because the vast majority of americans have no idea who he is. But it clearly gave some people who were looking for a reason to be skeptical of anything Petraeus says that reason.
    What did you expect he'd say?

    "Yes, Hugh, we're really in a bind. In fact, we're getting our @sses handed to us..."

    Is it so hard for those who haven't been there to believe things are getting better, contrary to what is shown on MSM?
    Example is better than precept.

  3. #3
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default Issues

    There are some issues here – especially with the “general public”. The administration’s history of denial and painting a rosy picture in Iraq is not only haunting the suits but the uniformed leadership as well.

    For the most part Council members – and the military at large – understand that General Petraeus is a straight shooter and has an extensive grasp of what it takes to win the COIN fight. As oblong pointed out – he is virtually unknown to the average Joe on the street who may have supported the war early on (and maybe longer) but feels somewhat betrayed and generally pissed off on how this all unfolded.

    Now is the time for a full-court information press on what the new strategy means, the ramifications of a wholesale pull-out, and (with the clock reset to a spring – summer 2007 start) how long it takes to conduct successful COIN ops – even when you are doing “everything right”… This is critical as publications such as Salon and The New Republic are pounding out their own IO message – each and every day.

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Paul Krugman weighed in on the 19th in the NYT:
    Paul Krugman: All the President’s Enablers

    In other words, General Petraeus, without saying anything falsifiable, conveyed the totally misleading impression, highly convenient for his political masters, that victory was just around the corner. And the best guess has to be that he’ll do the same thing three years later.
    The pile-on from the left is starting.
    Last edited by mmx1; 07-22-2007 at 02:41 AM.

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Things may well be improving in Iraq, perhaps dramatically. But my question is Is giving an interview to a highly partisan radio host the right way to spread that message to a skeptical public, and more important, to Congress. Petraeus should have known how his appearance on that show would be spinned.

  6. #6
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Why should he have known?

    Quote Originally Posted by oblong View Post
    Things may well be improving in Iraq, perhaps dramatically. But my question is Is giving an interview to a highly partisan radio host the right way to spread that message to a skeptical public, and more important, to Congress. Petraeus should have known how his appearance on that show would be spinned.
    He's been sort of busy the last four years and I suspect he's not a blog visitor or a talk radio listener. Most Generals are studiously apolitical in the domestic politics sense at least publicly so he could well not have had a clue.

    Heard he did another for NPR recently. I imagine he'd do one with anyone who asked and the mainstream media almost certainly hasn't asked -- though they may now.

    Regardless the left leaning blogs and talking headless will have fun for a few days. Fortunately, the attention span out there is pretty short.

  7. #7
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default Credibility

    Quote Originally Posted by SWJED View Post
    There are some issues here – especially with the “general public”. The administration’s history of denial and painting a rosy picture in Iraq is not only haunting the suits but the uniformed leadership as well.

    For the most part Council members – and the military at large – understand that General Petraeus is a straight shooter and has an extensive grasp of what it takes to win the COIN fight. As oblong pointed out – he is virtually unknown to the average Joe on the street who may have supported the war early on (and maybe longer) but feels somewhat betrayed and generally pissed off on how this all unfolded.

    Now is the time for a full-court information press on what the new strategy means, the ramifications of a wholesale pull-out, and (with the clock reset to a spring – summer 2007 start) how long it takes to conduct successful COIN ops – even when you are doing “everything right”… This is critical as publications such as Salon and The New Republic are pounding out their own IO message – each and every day.

    Excellent post, Dave. Anyone ever tell you to consider starting a web site for dicussions?

    Seriously, great points. Even among those familiar with the issues some rosy predictions tend to act like sugar in cavities. As for those who do not track the issues, we do need a sustained IO effort to get their attention across the political spectrum. Even the comments after your post suggest that may be misinterpreted. As Ken said, I believe he was on NPR but so far no one has chosed to turn that "affliation" into an issue.

    All of this points to just how deep the credibility gap is at this stage. I believe that McCaffrey's last stitrep had it right when he said general support for the war is gone and that our efforts regardless of wisdom or correctness in a military/strategic sense are on a timed clock.

    Best

    Tom,

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Washington, Texas
    Posts
    305

    Default A committment to defeat

    Most of those who objected to the General's statements or his forum for making it are already committed to our defeat in Iraq and they object to anything that might contradict that objective. While Hugh Hewitt is a center right host, he also interviews several leftist and war opponents in a respectful way. I think the real objection to the interview is that he elicited facts that do not support the narrative of the war's opponents.

    If we are going to fight small wars, and make no mistake many of the opponents of the Iraq war want us never to fight them, our military leaders are going to have to come up with a way to buy the political time needed to make their effort successful in the theater of action. What we have discovered is that the real center of gravity for these efforts is in the public opinion of Americans who are not engaged in the theater of operations. It is an important area of the war effort that cannot be ignored.

    The enemy has said that half its efforts are in the media battle space, and that is certainly the area where he has had the most success.

  9. #9
    Council Member SSG Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fort Leavenworth, KS
    Posts
    125

    Default Isn't it astounding?

    The lack of or refusal to use critical thinking skills in America is astounding. Are we so needy that we gravitate to the point of view that is the most comforting rather than to accept the truth when it is right in front of you smacking you in the nose repeatedly? I don't know, sometimes I get so frustrated with some of the spin our government (both sides) try to pass off on Americans.
    Don't taze me bro!

  10. #10
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Default

    The Pope and all the Prophets could have been standing behind General P. nodding their heads in approval when he told the world what the reality in Iraq is and it wouldn't matter, some would still call him a Halliburton-Bush-Cheney puppet.

  11. #11
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RTK View Post
    Is it so hard for those who haven't been there to believe things are getting better, contrary to what is shown on MSM?
    Yes, because:

    1. The boy who cried wolf factor.
    2. We're still being lied to; the Anbar awakening predates the surge as confirmed by one of our council members who was there, but that's not the spin.
    3. Things rarely get better in the Middle East and they rarely stay that way. Other than, possibly, for Israel.

    Also, you should consider

    1. There's a difference between better and "good enough." For a significant amount of people, "We're finding less bodies in the streets" isn't good enough.
    2. Getting better hasn't achieved the objective. Lots of intelligent people, including many in the military, don't believe that the objective is achievable.
    3. Better for who? All many people care about is the US casualty rate. I'm sure if it dropped to zero, the political debate would change radically.
    4. You're forgetting about the cost. Many taxpayers - including many here - don't want to pay more in taxes to make America better. Why should they pay to make Iraq better? (The military isn't used to this, but I suspect you're now in the same boat as the teacher who insists that with just a few dollars they could provide better education, or the engineering who wanted to build better flood protection for New Orleans. You may be right, but the best place for the money that I earn is in my pocket.)

  12. #12
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi RA,

    Really good points!

    I'd add in a couple of others to sort of round it out:

    1. The Big Lie - pretty much everyone has heard about this in one form or another, but awareness of its possibility leads to a jaundiced view of anything "official".

    2. Most people don't know enough history to recognize the patterns of what will happen if there is a precipitous pullout. And, given the cost of staying as you noted, why should "we" stay?
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  13. #13
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    169

    Default

    There's a lot of talk here about what the general public doesn't understand, and I completely agree. Whenever I mention COIN to someone, they look dumbfounded because they've never heard of it. (and never mind when I mention names like Nagl or Kilcullen. They don't even care who they are and what they've done until I throw in the word Dr. or give their credentials/bio)

    How can you, the military, (or maybe I could ask should you?) "teach" the general public about COIN so that they'll understand it better? I mean if I, who knows very little about COIN, can get it, why can't the public?

    Is the only reason I'm understanding it because, a.) I have an interest in learning more about it or b.) I'm paying more attention to what's going on in Iraq from the people who know what they're talking about/doing (i.e. using better sources of information than most do)?

    Maybe I should ask, does it even matter that the gen. public understands this? IMHO, yes it does matter...a lot. I've never changed an anti-war or a "bomb all the Muslims" person, but I helped change their attitude a bit when I explained to them how COIN works.

  14. #14
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    2. We're still being lied to; the Anbar awakening predates the surge as confirmed by one of our council members who was there, but that's not the spin.
    I'm going to address this one because I am sick and tired of hearing it. First of all the "surge" is not nor was it ever the new strategy. The surge is simply a means to provide more troops to facilitate the new strategy. The new strategy is about pushing more troops out of the FOBs and getting them out where they can do more good. The commanders on the ground did not wait for the surge to start implementing this. Yes, the Anbar awakening started before the surge but without help from us it would have died there. No one is lying about it and I am sick and tired of hearing people who do not have enough information to have an opinion on the issue make grand sweeping statements like "We're being lied to."

    SFC W

  15. #15
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Uboat,

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    I'm going to address this one because I am sick and tired of hearing it. First of all the "surge" is not nor was it ever the new strategy. The surge is simply a means to provide more troops to facilitate the new strategy. The new strategy is about pushing more troops out of the FOBs and getting them out where they can do more good. The commanders on the ground did not wait for the surge to start implementing this. Yes, the Anbar awakening started before the surge but without help from us it would have died there. No one is lying about it and I am sick and tired of hearing people who do not have enough information to have an opinion on the issue make grand sweeping statements like "We're being lied to."
    Well, without speaking for RA, I took his points as being "popular understandings" more than anything else. Of course the surge isn't a strategy, but it has been spun as one by a number of politicians and some media who conflate the surge with a strategy. Since most non-military people use the term "strategy" to cover everything from "how I am going to make breakfast" to "how I will penetrate the Chinese market and achieve world widget domination", I really don't find it surprising that they can't distinguish between them.

    What I saw RAs list as was a series of reasons (actually, emotional responses, not rational thought) why the "common man" doesn't believe pretty much anything coming out from "official sources" - the blocks to communicative legitimacy as it were.
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  16. #16
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Releasing contradictory data about important metrics does not help.

  17. #17
    Council Member RTK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wherever my stuff is
    Posts
    824

    Default

    I'll be foreward and honest with you;

    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    1. The boy who cried wolf factor.

    1. Horrbile analogy. There's a difference between listening and hearing. Most of the public has been hearing what they want to hear and not listening to the full story since the beginning of this war, typically hearing what suits their own preconceived notions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    2. We're still being lied to; the Anbar awakening predates the surge as confirmed by one of our council members who was there, but that's not the spin.
    2. The Surge isnt' the strategy. Clear, Hold, Build is. What 1/1 AD was doing in Anbar that set the stage for the Anbar Awakening is a macro level of Tal Afar. People are missing the big picture here. The strategy has changed sginificantly in the last year. The surge has only accelerated progress with a new strategy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    3. Things rarely get better in the Middle East and they rarely stay that way. Other than, possibly, for Israel.
    3. A narrow-minded and shortsighted approach to the Middle East. You're judging them with Western standards in mind. This clearly does not translate. The most basic cultural awareness class reminds us of this each time we deploy.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    1. There's a difference between better and "good enough." For a significant amount of people, "We're finding less bodies in the streets" isn't good enough.
    If that's the only metric you're looking at, then you aren't seeking the bigger picture. What improvements are being made in sewage disposal, water treatment, electricity per day, academic institutions, trash removal, medical services, and local security? If you're looking for body counts only, that's about the poorest metric I can think of.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    2. Getting better hasn't achieved the objective. Lots of intelligent people, including many in the military, don't believe that the objective is achievable.
    Not in 4 years its not. TX Hammes makes an excellent point in a History Channel Documentary dated 2004, stating words to the effect that the Malaysian Counterinsurgency Campaign took around 15 years. Others have taken upwards of 40. So the gold standard in the last century is 15 years, with an average of about 25. The American people don't have the patience to prosecute a war they don't understand nor do they care about understanding. For the vast majority of them, it doesn't affect them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    3. Better for who? All many people care about is the US casualty rate. I'm sure if it dropped to zero, the political debate would change radically.
    BS. All many people care about is what Brittney Spears is doing this week or how OJ Simpson is going to get out the next jam. They could care less about what the strategic military objective in Iraq is, or, much less, how it's affecting the family of some poor Iraqi they'll never have to deal with anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
    4. You're forgetting about the cost. Many taxpayers - including many here - don't want to pay more in taxes to make America better. Why should they pay to make Iraq better? (The military isn't used to this, but I suspect you're now in the same boat as the teacher who insists that with just a few dollars they could provide better education, or the engineering who wanted to build better flood protection for New Orleans. You may be right, but the best place for the money that I earn is in my pocket.)
    Last I checked, I pay taxes too, and I've spent 24 months in Iraq. Does that mean I have a greater vested interest? I'd suspect you'd say no.

    Leaving Iraq is morally and ethically irresponsible (How dare I bring morals and ethics into a discussion like this). Regardless of the reasons we invaded, however valid or invalid any of them are, we created the situation over there. I'm sick and tired of the same old line; "We haven't found WMDs," "This is about Oil," "We went there to fight Al Qaeda." At this point, 4 years into this, we need to get over ourselves and face reality. We're there. We're going to be there for a while. Deal with it. How do we, as an American people, make things better?

    I feel, as an American, like I'm on the New York Giants, with the entire country as the team. It's always someone else's fault and no one wants to accept responsibility for what's going on. The team sucks right now. No one is on the same page. Most people are so damned preoccupied with blaming someone else that they don't see the real issue right in front of their faces. We're in Iraq. We're tasked with building a government and providing security. We are. Not the Army, not the Marine Corps. We. What has John Q. Public done besides slap a yellow ribbon on his bumper or perhaps sent a package around Christmas? Not a damned thing.

    You may say I'm a nepotist and you're probably right. After 6 years since 9/11 I've seen a country go from total support to "we support the troop and not the war" which is crap. I seldom listen to those who don't have a hand in this anymore, for reasons good, bad, or indifferent. If GEN George S. Patton was still alive, Old Blood and Guts would be pissed. I'd gather Chesty Puller is spinning in his grave. One day, I imagine, I will be too. Either way, I must be the last idiot that believes in this. And I'll continue to do so.
    Example is better than precept.

  18. #18
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    Hi Uboat,
    Well, without speaking for RA, I took his points as being "popular understandings" more than anything else. Of course the surge isn't a strategy, but it has been spun as one by a number of politicians and some media who conflate the surge with a strategy. Since most non-military people use the term "strategy" to cover everything from "how I am going to make breakfast" to "how I will penetrate the Chinese market and achieve world widget domination", I really don't find it surprising that they can't distinguish between them.

    What I saw RAs list as was a series of reasons (actually, emotional responses, not rational thought) why the "common man" doesn't believe pretty much anything coming out from "official sources" - the blocks to communicative legitimacy as it were.
    My issue is not so much that he does not understand what the strategy is but rather that he takes what little knowledge he has and makes the leap to "We're being lied to."

    SFC W

  19. #19
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Thumbs up Nah, you aren't the only one - but you are more patient

    than most. I for one appreciate that.

    I would've been less so and would have pointed out that anyone who pays much attention to anything any politician or political appointee says is hopelessly naive; that no one lied to me about the surge turning anything around -- every pronouncement I've read had been very cautious (other than the civilian bloggers and the always clueless news media).

    Not a fan of metrics. They have a purpose but in war, that purpose seems to be to totally confuse issues. They are incredibly hard to obtain with any accuracy and have a tendency to change rapidly, thus they are routinely manipulated by both sides in any discussion to counter each other. That seems totally intuitive to me but others apparently don't see it that way...

    The bulk of Americans don't care about casualties. There are many that make much of them on both sides but IMO, the majority of noise is mere political theater. Most Americans want results, period and they want them rapidly. Not going to happen.

    The taxpayer bit is always somewhat galling to me for the reasons you state plus the incredible amounts the Congress wastes here in the US. If there's a Congroid with over two terms who does not have a host of hignways, overpasses, bridges, buildings, Federal this or that Centers and whatever named after him or her, I'd like a list...

    Marc is correct, RA's items are indeed popular understandings -- too popular. They are also largely incorrect and I fault this administration as being the absolute worst of the twelve I've lived under in getting out a coherent message for a part of that. I could also rant about the media and the education system being even greater contributors but this isn't the thread for that. I'll just say that everyone has a right to an opinion and to express it. Seems to me that gives one an obligation to have an understanding beyond the popular 'wisdom' and a logical construct in expressing that opinion.

  20. #20
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    204

    Wink

    The bulk of Americans don't care about casualties. There are many that make much of them on both sides but IMO, the majority of noise is mere political theater. Most Americans want results, period and they want them rapidly. Not going to happen.
    One additional point, if I may (from an ex-pol). The great bulk (probably at least 75%+) of the American people do not do "Lose" well - I mean not at all. Losses, and all the money - you will get a pass if you win. Now, you can debate what "winning" is, but but I'm convinced with the American people, "They knows it when they sees It" - all the spin otherwise means nothing. And IMHO, they saw both GEN Petraeus and AMB Crocker this last week and they said "winners".

    The taxpayer bit is always somewhat galling to me for the reasons you state plus the incredible amounts the Congress wastes here in the US. If there's a Congroid with over two terms who does not have a host of hignways, overpasses, bridges, buildings, Federal this or that Centers and whatever named after him or her, I'd like a list...
    We, if I really sat down & worked at it, I might be able to come up with a really, really short list....ok...a really, really, really short list.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •