Hot Air » Blog Archive » Audio: NPR asks Petraeus, “How does this end?”

Audio: NPR asks Petraeus, “How does this end?”

posted at 1:25 pm on July 28, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Answer: A hell of a lot better than it would have if the left had had its way last year, although naturally he’s prohibited from saying so. But couple his response to the question with his point that withdrawal has to be conditions-based and it’s clear what he thinks the consequences of a significant U.S. drawdown in the near term would be. Good thing Barack Obama no longer favors one.

He says he’ll have further recommendations for withdrawal — again, conditions permitting — next month, which could be quite the monkey wrench in the two parties’ convention messages, needless to say. My hunch is that as the Iraq debate gets more nuanced with “time horizons” versus “timetables” and McCain and Obama increasingly borrowing elements of each other’s rhetoric, most voters will simply shrug off whatever Petraeus has to say. If I’m wrong, though, then which way will it break if the world’s most credible opponent of timetables decides they can now comfortably lose another two brigades, say? Superficially, any withdrawal helps Obama, but since one of Maverick’s biggest liabilities is the “100 years” comment, having an authority and de facto ally like Petraeus bless a modest drawdown is something McCain should be able to coopt to reassure the public that he’s not interested in occupation for the sake of occupation.

Speaking of generals opposed to hasty withdrawal, Tom Maguire asks a good question: Where is Gen. Zinni these days? The ranks of military authorities touted by doves have been thin ever since Gen. Batiste came around on the surge. Who’s left at this point besides Wes Clark?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

Who’s left? McPeak … oh, wait a minute …

Ed Morrissey on July 28, 2008 at 1:35 PM

as the Iraq debate gets more nuanced with “time horizons” versus “timetables” and McCain and Obama increasingly borrowing elements of each other’s rhetoric

I don’t think getting nuanced is in McCain’s best interests. He should emphasize his commitment to getting the job done well and thoroughly, and his experience in matters military. It may be that he and Obama happen to agree on numbers today, but it’s how they got there and what they will think in January that matters. Because it’s all about judgement, isn’t it?

MamaAJ on July 28, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Answer:

“We win, they lose.”

Sir Napsalot on July 28, 2008 at 1:42 PM

How does this end?

We win… they lose.

(That was Ronald Reagan’s answer on the cold war)

Maxx on July 28, 2008 at 1:43 PM

This is how Obama wants it to end……

Google: GLOBAL POVERTY ACT

volsense on July 28, 2008 at 1:43 PM

Sir Napsalot on July 28, 2008 at 1:42 PM

Honestly, I did not see your post before I posted. But its clearly the answer to the question.

Maxx on July 28, 2008 at 1:44 PM

“NPR finally stops getting welfare checks from taxpayers.”

“Oh wait, the war? We won, overcoming the best efforts of the Democrat Party and the Democrat Party Media to stage another Saigon airlift. I love the smell of charred donkey carcasses in the morning.”

NoDonkey on July 28, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Maxx on July 28, 2008 at 1:44 PM

That’s because you have more words to type.

Sir Napsalot on July 28, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Answer:

“We win, they lose.”

Sir Napsalot on July 28, 2008 at 1:42 PM

This is a good thing!

TooTall on July 28, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Iraq is relatively peaceful now only because thousands of AQI were turned into peaceful bio-hazardous waste.

RBMN on July 28, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Every war from now on the president will have to take into account that there will always be a Democrat front to any war. They will work with our enemies to try and ensure our defeat. Disgusting.

Mojave Mark on July 28, 2008 at 1:50 PM

occupation for the sake of occupation. — Allahpundit

American troops have never occupied for the sake of occupation. Leaving a permanent base or bases in Iraq would be smart, just like we have in Japan and South Korea but nobody seems to acknowledge that or advocate for it. After we pull out Iraq will be back to a dictatorship within ten years or less.

Maxx on July 28, 2008 at 1:55 PM

Uhhhhh, why does our money go to support a Left Wing, anti-American, wacko radio network? Where’s the NPR for the Right? WTF?

marklmail on July 28, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Iraq is relatively peaceful now only because thousands of AQI were turned into peaceful bio-hazardous waste.

RBMN on July 28, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Today in Iraq:

Two bombs.
Fifty-three dead.
Two hundred and forty hurt.

Just another useless factoid.

factoid on July 28, 2008 at 2:04 PM

He says he’ll have further recommendations for withdrawal — again, conditions permitting — next month, which could be quite the monkey wrench in the two parties’ convention messages, needless to say.

Which is why I wouldn’t count on any comments until AFTER the conventions are over. Professional military folks don’t meddle with politics that way.

highhopes on July 28, 2008 at 2:06 PM

Who’s left at this point besides Wes Clark?

…hard pressed to be left beside Wes Clark between the rock and the hard place.

West Clark, if west is always left on the political map…

maverick muse on July 28, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Murtha?

Sir Napsalot on July 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM

RBMN

Iraq is relatively peaceful now only because thousands of AQI …

Have gone Eastern.
Have a nice flight…

Monas on July 28, 2008 at 2:14 PM

“We lose, they win.” [/pelosi/reid]

jukin on July 28, 2008 at 2:17 PM

How does this end?
Answer: It is none of your business, you didn’t care when we were having trouble, now that we are winning you care…this ain’t the NFL…

right2bright on July 28, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Which is why I wouldn’t count on any comments until AFTER the conventions are over. Professional military folks don’t meddle with politics that way.

If Petraeus waits until after the conventions to make his recommendations, this would help McCain.

Obama, in order to wow his lefty supporters in Denver (and head off a possible challenge from Hillary) will probably call for his unconditional 16-month withdrawal. McCain will probably tell Republicans that his drawdown will be based on conditions on the ground as he is advised by military commanders, so that we eventually leave victorious.

If Petraeus then comes back and says that a 16-month drawdown would be dangerous, McCain would look wise and Obama would look stupid and stubborn, unwilling to listen to people with more expertise than himself.

If Petraeus says that a 16-month withdrawal is possible, the issue becomes a wash, but McCain could say that it was the surge strategy he prescribed and Obama opposed that made a withdrawal possible now, whereas Obama’s proposed withdrawal in 14 months starting in January 2007 would have resulted in chaos in Iraq and a possible Iranian takeover, at a time when Iran is threatening to develop nuclear weapons.

Steve Z on July 28, 2008 at 2:31 PM

If I’m wrong, though, then which way will it break if the world’s most credible opponent of timetables decides they can now comfortably lose another two brigades, say?

In Theory: Sending some troops home, then waiting to assess conditions, then repeat, should favor McCain.

In Actuality: It will favor whomever the media feels like favoring

In Short: We’re boned.

BohicaTwentyTwo on July 28, 2008 at 2:37 PM

If Petraeus then comes back and says that a 16-month drawdown would be dangerous, McCain would look wise and Obama would look stupid and stubborn, unwilling to listen to people with more expertise than himself.

That would be a really clever one-two punch but I have to wonder would it be effective.

1. Obama supporters aren’t all that interested in what General Patraeus says. They just want to hear the surrender talk and don’t care about consequences.

2. The DOD statements will probably be more generic in nature so as not to get in the middle of the Obama/McCain foodfight. Plus, they never know who is going to be writing the checks in just a few months so if you are going to meddle in politics, you’d better be sure who is going to win.

3. I’m not so sure that McCain doesn’t have stupid and stubborn already wrapped up from the way he got himself involved in the AF tanker contracts. The selection process was flawed but he was so intent in hating Boeing that he didn’t listen to those telling him he was going about his vendetta in the wrong fashion.

highhopes on July 28, 2008 at 2:53 PM

“How does this end?”

How do things that involve lots and lots of Muslims worshiping Allah, Muhammad and the Koran usually end?

MB4 on July 28, 2008 at 3:11 PM

Who’s left at this point besides Wes Clark?

Wes Clark with a disquise?

ThePrez on July 28, 2008 at 3:48 PM

How do things that involve lots and lots of Muslims worshiping Allah, Muhammad and the Koran usually end?

MB4 on July 28, 2008 at 3:11 PM

This one ended with the victory of the Christians. It took 750 years though…

factoid on July 28, 2008 at 4:06 PM

no, that’s Wuss Clark.

The Ritz on July 28, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Bush is still the president and right now Patraeus answers to him. So if he says troop drawdowns can take place in the relatively near future, Bush will be the one giving that order. And I would think that would help McCain.

Terrye on July 28, 2008 at 5:17 PM

Today in Iraq:

Two bombs.
Fifty-three dead.
Two hundred and forty hurt.

Just another useless factoid.

factoid on July 28, 2008 at 2:04 PM

No one for one second thinks that there isnt more barbarity left in the sub-humans trying to control the Iraqis.

Its too bad that there are more than enough people who would fly such a flag that would only encourage resilience in this atrocious enemy.

Sonosam on July 28, 2008 at 5:22 PM

“How does this end?”

Short answer:

While commanding the 101st Airborne Division during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, David H. Petraeus famously mused to journalist Rick Atkinson, “Tell me how this ends.” Asked today by The Washington Independent how he would answer that if one of his own division commanders posed it, Petraeus replied by phone from Baghdad’s Camp Victory, “I would just reiterate what our objectives are, and that is what we’re trying to help the Iraqis achieve. And that is: an Iraq that is at peace with itself and with its neighbors; and can defend itself; that is a democracy in Iraqi fashion — I would also say a government that is represent of and responsive to all its citizens.”

From “King David”; Fifth in a Series: The Rise of the Counterinsurgents; by Spencer Ackerman; Washington Independent; 05/06/2008

Ackerman’s seventh part of the series was published today (A Counterinsurgency Guide for Politicos) and deals with former top Petraeus COIN adviser David Kilcullen’s forthcoming handbook on COIN for civilian policy-makers entitled “Counterinsurgency: A Guide for Policy-Makers”

Money quote:

Asked for comment, the handbook’s chief author, David Kilcullen, a former Australian Army officer who is now an adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, explained that it tells policy-makers to “think very, very carefully before intervening.” More bluntly, Kilcullen, who helped Petraeus design his 2007 counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, called the decision to invade Iraq “stupid” — in fact, he said “fucking stupid” — and suggested that if policy-makers apply the manual’s lessons, similar wars can be avoided in the future.

Iraq in four words: Stupid in, Smart out.

ganeshpuri89 on July 28, 2008 at 6:00 PM

This is third hand.

Subject: From our friend who is serving in Afghanistan
Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2008, 10:15 AM

Hello everyone,
As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass
along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour
on his visit to ‘The War Zone’. I wanted to share with you what
happened.
He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the
area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here
at Bagram.

As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and
didn’t say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the
General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell
(pretty much a big top tent that militar y personnel can play
basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity
pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk
to Soldiers to thank them for their service.

So really he was just here to make a showing for the American’s back
home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are
going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank
those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you.

I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the
Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to
be the President of the United States. I just don’t understand how
anyone would want him to be our Commander-in-Chief. It was almost that
he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and
our great country.

If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I
wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is.
What you see in the news is all fake.

In service,
CPT Jeffrey S. Porter
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier

burt on July 28, 2008 at 8:29 PM

Fake.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/afghanistan.asp

Just another useless factoid.

factoid on July 28, 2008 at 9:59 PM

[When Obama went to Jordan a few days ago they said “The guy gets it. Sharp, aware and a very good listener. He doesn’t seem stuck in preconceived positions.”]

Who the heck are they that you refer to? They said??? Maybe those notorious strawmen that appear in the NYT and NEWSWEAK. Well I can say that others said that he was preoccupied and disinterested. Yadda yadda yadda.

You’ve proven yourself a useless hemorrhoid.

Bluecaper on July 29, 2008 at 12:55 AM

Comment pages:

You must be logged in to post a comment.