Petraeus Gives Exclusive One Hour Interview To Fox »

This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed

Comments: 98

• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  david_nwpa

  Sept. 9, 2007, 2:50 p.m.

  General Petraeus should speak out to the nation and tell them exactly what he included in his report. If he firmly believes that the surge is working, then it most likely is (as far as the neo-cons are concerned). If he has done a cost-benefit analysis and discovered that more of them are dying with fewer of our bullets, then the war is a "success."

  Remember, at Faux News, they are always fair and (un)balanced.
• 

  anioklyComment has been removed: Spammer
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  david_nwpa

  Sept. 9, 2007, 3:08 p.m.

  I suppose Rupert Murdoch told you that, aniokly? If he wanted to reach as many people as possible, why not go on Meet the Press or sit in the Situation Room, with Wolf Blitzer? I am sure both Tim Russert and Wolf would hit him with some hard questions.

  I want to know whether his leash is longer or shorter than the one Tony Blair wore. I suppose that is a question to be debated by historians.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  TechnologyExpert

  Sept. 9, 2007, 3:10 p.m.

  If he wanted to reach as many as possible, he wouldn't make it an exclusive. It's clear why he picked Fox News, fair and UNbalanced.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  GrainOfSand

  Sept. 9, 2007, 7:14 p.m.

  He wanted to reach as many NeoCons as possible, they'll believe anything Fox News tells them. The General can't be in a hostile environment with Tim or Wolf, or any other news outlet other than Fox. I would love to see Keith Olbermann ask him a few pointed questions! That would be very interesting, instead of watching the Mutual Admiration Society that is Fox News interviewing their hero with easy questions that probably won't require much lying or propaganda, it's built in already!
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  jordan11

  Sept. 9, 2007, 10:06 p.m.

  Anyone who treats faux media with credibility, has none themselves.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  UncontrollableScaldingDiarrhea

  Sept. 10, 2007, 3:25 a.m.

  Ah, I love the sound of Lib gnashing of teeth.

  Fox dances rings around the competition again. Why not Olbermann you say? Because an hour of being asked repeatedly, "General, we the know the war is lost so why are you saying that troops should continue to fight a lost war since we already know that the war is lost and fighting a lost war makes no sense?", would get boring about five minutes into the interview.

  Better luck next time.

  I'll bring over another gallon of double chocolate moose tracks ice cream to help this moment of angst pass. I know the gallon I brought over a few days ago is long gone.
• 

  AlphaGnosisComment has been removed: Hard Banned
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  coolhand

  Sept. 10, 2007, 9:13 a.m.

  This guy was hand picked for his spot in Iraq. He gets to play with real bullets and every new piece of experimental equipment they are pumping out these days. Of course he is going to side with gomer pyle(GWB). White sands can't invent the new stuff fast enoungh to get it in theatre. The real story will come from the joint chiefs, staff meetings and their recommendations, as long as they are allowed to stick to their own veiws and not forced to support this corrupt war. Everyone but the common people are getting rich off this war. Their may be a lull in the attacks, but mark my words any day their will be a car bomb in a market place with hundreds of people killed. We seem to mark our achievements by how many soldiers get killed, not the innocent victims in the markets and road sides. Of course our casualities are down as we learn to defend better with better armament and sensing equipment. What about the Iraqi people. Don't they count?
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  ZiegfeldGirl

  Sept. 10, 2007, 9:16 a.m.

  You mean he didn't choose one of the networks that have already called him a liar? Shocking!

  I watched Meet the Press and This Week with Snuffalupogus, they spent nearly the entire time explaining why, no matter what Petraeus says, he is a liar.

  *yawn* Saw that coming a mile away.
• 

  anioklyComment has been removed: Spammer
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  badnootka

  Sept. 10, 2007, 9:49 a.m.

  It will not matter what Petraeus says, who he says it to or what the true reality on the ground is. The democrats will not believe him, and wilol continue to press for the war to be lost. It is not in the best interest of the democrats to have the Iraq war a success at this time because they have invested all of their political capital on it's loss. ANy success in Iraq will be met with denial and derision by the democrats as this is their November 2008 election issue. Without it the people of the US have no reason or use for them. THey have promised the world and delivered nothing but devisivness. THey said they would withdraw from Iraq. Did not happen. They said they would impeach Bush. Did not happen. They promise everything and deliver nothing. THey are trying to grab power at any cost, without a plan for the aftermath of the pullout. No plan of action, with the only action taken designed to divide the nation and obtain power at any expense. Again, no plan for the aftermath.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  pcknowledge

  Sept. 10, 2007, 10:34 a.m.

  General Petraeus works for Bush, is a political pawn & of course is going to say what Bush expects him to say. It's impossible for him to maintain his integrity at this point. For people who keep agreeing that this Iraq war is making progress, I wonder if you have any friends stationed there or who work for any American security company there. If you did, you would know many more Iraqi civilians have died in this war then Saddam ever killed. Iraq's infrastrucure is completly destroyed & will take yrs if not decades to rebuild. For those of you who really believe Bush will be able to eventualy establish the type of government that he wants in Iraq, you have never visited any region in the Middle East & are sadly mistaken. It's not a western country, does not operate on Bush's terms & never will. Might as well cut our losses now before more people die on both sides & Iraq is ruined 100%.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  quackpot

  Sept. 10, 2007, 10:38 a.m.

  Mr. Petreus began his tenure in Iraq with a high degree of credibility. Each day, it seems, the White House does all that it can to undermine his credibility.

  Why is the Bush administration trying to micromanage Mr. Petreus' assessment? Why is the White House submitting the report, not Petreus?

  Is the stuation in Iraq so bad that Petreus can't be trusted to be off of his VERY short leash?
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Poulenc

  Sept. 10, 2007, 12:03 p.m.

  Zieg, why SHOULDN'T Petreus take his case to those who are most likely to challenge him--assuming that case holds water?

  It's not the choir that requires converting. Moving out of one's ideological "comfort zone" would help to establish credibility/one's case. Assuming there's a valid one. (Or, alternatively, one could spread one's propaganda.)
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  DoerNotASayer

  Sept. 10, 2007, noon

  I saw the neocons on the news shows yesterday morning, all parroting how the "surge is working" (gee, doesn't it all sound too familiar?? it fits right in with all the other lies and spin..."it's hard work"...."we're making progress"....etc...).

  Kind of funny (or sad), that spin doesn't align with the fact that August was the second deadliest month for Iraqis since the start of the war. Is that what surge is supposed to mean....a surge in the death of innocent civilians?

  Of course, this great "liberal" media we have never brings up this fact while the pro-Bush neocons are spouting their lies.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  NoWayMan

  Sept. 10, 2007, 12:20 p.m.

  bush is simply trying to buy time until he can CUT AND RUN on iraq.

  just like he's going to cut and run on everything else.

  he's the cut and run president.

  if you don't see that by now you have your head up your asss.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Tcaros

  Sept. 10, 2007, 12:28 p.m.

  Where is luvmyturds?
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  crghss

  Sept. 10, 2007, 12:47 p.m.

  And they hate the Drudgereport too. Why does the left hate the Drudge report so much?
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  djn3nunez3

  Sept. 10, 2007, 1:23 p.m.

  Isn't this a repeat of the Westmoreland report to the President?

  The "Surge" is only a for Americans. Iraq has been in a Civil war since the fall of Saddam. The "Surge" will never put Iraq back together again.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  joeblowe

  Sept. 10, 2007, 1:32 p.m.

  The use of the word "exclusive" is probably incorrect. As a member of the U.S. military, he doesn't have the option to give "exclusive" interviews. As OUR representative, he should be giving interviews either to A) No one or B) Everyone - depending on how sensitive the information is that he is trying to impart. In this case, I don't think there are many secrets in there anywhere.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  zootallures

  Sept. 10, 2007, 1:58 p.m.

  fox news: fair and balanced.

  this just in - pig grows wings.

All 98 comments are shown.