Petraeus versus the President? »
Posted By jovial 9 months, 1 week ago in News
In part one of our interview with Gareth Porter, Porter explains his discovery that Gen. David Petraeus, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other US military leaders have been applying pressure on Obama to change his plan for US withdrawal from Iraq. It appears however that Obama is standing firm on his campaign promise to withdraw all combat troops within 16 months of his inauguration. According to Porter, the military has already begun its public relations campaign to paint recent events in Iraq in their favor, meanwhile setting Obama up for the fall in the future.
Read Full Story at therealnews.com »
3286 Views Share Story 160 Comments Report
Submitted By:
jovial
Grew up In Brooklyn. Joined the Navy in 1976 stayed in 10 years. Aircraft Electronics tech. Worked for Major Govt. contractor then settled in California ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 160 (view all)
-
-
89%
Goppy9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
He better. The Iraq war is one of the most tragic blunders in our nation's history.
Reply
Let me repeat.
THE IRAQ WAR IS ONE OF THE MOST TRAGIC BLUNDERS IN OUR NATION'S HISTORY.
I believe if Obama backs down from his campaign pledge - it will say that "he went to Washington to Washington and Washington changed him."
The Iraq war is a stain on our nation - and it must be eradicated.
It is the very symbol of Presidential FRAUD and DUPLICITY ... of massive CYNICISM and IDEOLOGICAL PERVERSION.
We need to extricate ourselves ... to regain our Moral Standing ... and apply a salve our national conscience.
.-
galletta6121Comment removed: Spam
-
20%
jimdoze9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"THE IRAQ WAR IS ONE OF THE MOST TRAGIC BLUNDERS IN OUR NATION'S HISTORY"
Reply
You could not be more wrong, Goppy.
If Obama fully draws down American combat troops in 16 months, he will bring us to the brink and very likely into world war. He will succeed in opening southern Iraq to Iran, which will force the Kurds to go independent, which will in turn bring the Turks into northern Iraq to crush the Kurds and take the northern oilfields. The resulting warfare would have a very high probability of closing the Persian Gulf thereby pushing the world economy off a cliff. The resulting worldwide surge in economic nationalism would virtually guarantee widespread war.
The lack of strategic foresight that such moves speak to is beyond naive.
The underlying amorality of risking such a move is breathtaking. But, Goppy, I am sure it all will still serve to salve your grade school conception of "Moral Standing". -
95%
Beau78909 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If that's your argument, jim, then you admit Goppy's point that it was a huge strategic blunder to depose Saddam, who was able to keep all those competing forces in line. Right? After all, we wouldn't now be faced with two horrible choices, if we'd never gone in. Right?
Reply
You didn't happen to support "regime change" back in 2003--or earlier, did you? -
6%
jimdoze9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No, Beau, it was not a strategic blunder at all. Saddam was not going to live forever and the vacuum, in our absence, that would have been created by his demise, would have produced the same strategic dynamic that leaving now will produce.
Reply
Back in 2003, we were faced with re-arming Saddam, allowing him to re-arm himself or taking him out. Re-arming him or allowing him to re-arm himself might have been preferable to the Realpolitikers here. However, I submit that would have been the height of moral vacancy coupled with strategic idiocy.
Beau, Realpolitik during the cold war was strategically necessary and, as such, had at least some moral underpinnings. You would have to go a very long way to convince me that it was anywhere near strategically appropriate in Iraq... and, it certainly was not morally appropriate. -
100%
orndorffter9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You bet ya grandpa, Ito think Obama is making the right call. He wont back down, thet thought that Obama would be a puppet for them, so far his standing up and is none of their puppets.I have the faith every american should have that our President is and well do what he promised, This country needs some one who cares and that person is President Obama.I have no dault in my mind, Obama is going to put America and her people back where we were at one time. The great country America.
Reply -
100%
cowboygrandpa9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Jovial:
Reply
Thanks for the invite.
First of all, all we have accomplished by being in Iraq is the continued wasting of tax payer dollars for a lie.
This has cost us far to many innocent lives,in Iraq and here at home. We are taking funding away from where it will do the most good and putting in the hands of terrorists on both sides of the conflict.
No matter how long we stay we will not change what is going to happen. All we are doing is weakening ourselves; financially, morally, bodily, while splitting the people of this nation into two waring camps.
We entered the war on false premises and have continued to fight it knowing we are fighting based on a lie. Any wonder we are having so many problems.
I say get out, pull the troops back into a surrounding area where they will be a strike force ready to intervene if needed.
We better be watching Russia and Iran, as well as the other war like nations in the region. If we continue to waste our resources on Iraq we will not have the resources necessary for the real deal when it comes down.
Just my take on it. But Obama is making the right call.
As an aside we better start focusing on securing the borders of this nation. And I am not speaking of only the Mexican border, we have many Rusians in this country illegally as well as Chinese,Pakistanis,... My point being we do not know who is here to harm us, or make a better living for themselves. -
-
-
100%
Progressive9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the invite, jovial. Seems to me the President is elected to set policy and military leaders are responsible for developing the strategy to implement that policy.
Reply
I'm certain Obama listens to recommendations from Gates and the Generals, but I'm also confident of his ability to make informed decisions as Commander-in-Chief.-
-
20%
Endoscopy9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There goes Goppy again. Using the idea that any difference of opinion is "FRAUD and DUPLICITY ... of massive CYNICISM and IDEOLOGICAL PERVERSION". Only the far left wing view is good and proper.
Reply
The left ignores the facts that there were 22 other nations going into Iraq with us and that we went in under the UN mandate that allowed and member country to enforce their mandates against Hussein. The far left always rants that we attacked for a lie. The reason we went in was that Hussein NEVER allowed the inspectors free reign. They disallow the fact that over 500 WMD's were found although in bad shape for no maintenance. They disallow the fact that Husein used WMD's on the Kurds. They disallow the fact that there were mass graves because of all the people the Hussein family and others killed.
Way to go Goppy. Keep hammering the far left wing cause. At least this time you did not lie ans say you are a Christian conservative. -
100%
Jeboba9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gates and Petraeus are bought and paid for by the corporate interests that want to see the war go on as well as the oil companies that have not yet secured the Iraqis oil fields for themselves.
Reply
If Gates, Petraeus, and whomever else bucks up against Obama, he should fire them immediately for insubordination.
We have had quite enough of the neocon bull$hit!
-
-
100%
jovial9 months, 1 week ago
-
-
-
0%
jimdoze9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If Obama pulls the troops and things break down in Iraq, it will be his fault... pure and simple. Insofar as it will have political consequences for him, it will have been politicized. Pretty much everything a president does has political consequences. There is nothing new there.
Reply
-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user2 Replies
-
100%
pcknowledge9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This Iraq war was completly unneccessary. Saddam was of no threat to us, & a stabilizing force in Iraq & that entire ME region. Iraqis who were unhappy under Saddam's rule were free to leave Iraq, and the ones who were unhappy did leave & settle elsewhere. Had Saddam died, he would have been replaced by one of his sons who would have kept the stability going. There is no way to introduce democracy there, as their government simply doesn't function that way. We are wasting our highly valuable military, time & money there. Granted, Iraq has oil but what the hell oil was cheaper before Bush began the Iraq war so the Iraqis were selling it at fair market value anyways.
Reply
Now, because of the war Bush began in Iraq, Iraq & the region surrounding Iraq is in a volatile state of chaos. Obama's plan is to bring our troops home, but ground realities may be that when he does bring them home, more chaos will ensue & there won't be a Saddam keeping things as orderly as possible in that part of the world.
Obama is stuck with a war not of his calling; a war that will never see any type of desirable ending, at least not in our lifetime.
And, after all, yrs ago our government helped put Saddam in power by suppplying him with chemical weapons & helped him overthrow the democratically elected pro American Shah as well. Can't remember which President was involved, do remember D(R)umsfeld shaking hands w/Saddam back then. -
-
-
94%
engineer9 months, 1 week ago
-
0%
THOMNH629 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you libs are so smart what do you think we should do with N Korea, now that they have a long range war head that could strike the coast of California. What should we do with them, and where do you stand on a nuclear Iran. If you think Iraq was such a disaster what do we do when Iran nukes Israel or N Korea threatens the south.
Reply -
-
10%
Skeptic9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gen. David Petraeus will, as the good soldier he is, continue to follow the orders of his Commander in Chief and continue to give him his best advice. HST fired MacCarthur, a fate that Petraeuaus will avoid, if possible. Obama has already proven his incompetence and inability to pick advisors - one can only hope he is willing to take the advice of a General who has proven he knows his business.
Reply -
-
-
80%
slate9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Seeing how they've just had another election by the people of Iraq and a drastic reduction in violence and death, it does appear that it indeed may be time to come home and leave Iraq to her own destiny and be there if called for future assistance if asked for.
Reply
-
-
100%
Beau78909 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I suppose you believe we should start WWIII to neutralize all threats against us? Let's invade N. Korea, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Russia and China too if necessary, right?
Reply
We're not omnipotent. We don't have the money nor the manpower to do that. -
-
50%
Jeboba9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you're confusing your countries, leaders, and conflicts. There was no Shah of Iraq. That's the Shah of Iran you're thinking of. The Shah of Iran was installed by the U.S. by overthrowing a man the Iranian people democratically elected and loved. They hated "our" Shah.
Reply
The U.S. is the dirtiest country in the world. We play everyone against the other...installing our stooges to do our dirty work. In fact, Saddam was supported by us and called a friend because he went to war with Iran after they threw out "our" Shah and took our people hostage while bringing back from exile a religious nutcase to set their country back into the middle ages! -
50%
crghss9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is such a pile of bull. We've already signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA)stating we're leave before 2011. 16 months or 24 months what's the difference? Petraeus is currently drawing up plans to move troops to Afghanistan. So where this B.S. is coming from who knows or cares.
Reply -
100%
Beau78909 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh be serious, crghss. You know we armed both sides in the Iran-Iraq conflict during the '80s, in order to destabilize them both.
Reply
For that matter, we trained many who became the foundation for al-Qaeda to fight Russian forces in Afghanistan during the same period, but that's a whole other issue. -
-
0%
Endoscopy9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
More lies by a liberal.
Reply
"Initially Soviet deployment of the 40th Army in Afghanistan began on August 7, 1978.[3][not in citation given] The final troop withdrawal began on May 15, 1988, and ended on February 15, 1989."
"Al Qaeda (The Base) is an international Sunni Islamist extremist movement founded in 1988."
Your history is wrong. Al Qaeda started hen the Soviet troops were being withdrawn. So we did not arm them. Try again on that one.
"In 1982 with Iranian success on the battlefield, the U.S. made its backing of Iraq more pronounced, supplying it with intelligence, economic aid, normalizing relations with the government (broken during the 1967 Six-Day War), and also supplying weapons."
Again the liberal lie. The US only supported Iraq. Think about the fact that not long before Iran had taken our embassy and kept the people there as prisoners for a long time. Why doe the left make up these things?
-
-
100%
Jeboba9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't change the subject just because the discussion isn't going in your favor! Iran isn't going to nuke anyone you idiot! They may be religious nutbags but they're not stupid. They need our money for their oil. In the final analysis, it's all about money!
Reply -
-
0%
Endoscopy9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Always the lies about Bush. Is that all liberals can do? Everything is Bush's fault. Anybody that has a different point of view is a liar, evil, etc. Do you ever think that by saying those kind of things that you are saying what you are?
Reply-
galletta6121Comment removed: Spam
-
-
galletta6121Comment removed: Spam
-
galletta6121Comment removed: Spam
-
100%
hibridge9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What do the Iraqi people want .. for the US to leave or stay? Or doesn't that matter at all? While we're debating whether the US should continue what it started there or leave as soon as propitious .. has anybody asked the Iraqi people what their thoughts are on the subject? It is, after all, their country.
Reply-
100%
orndorffter9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Iraqi people said they did not want us there, they have come very close to our soliders, but they have said they dont want us to run their country, and dont want us there. You can't blme them because as you said it is there country, why do you think the reporter did what he did with the shoe to Bush.
Reply
-
-
50%
HMMace9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WELL--IF THE GEN WOULD JUST MOVE HIS ARMY OVER TO ARABIA--WE COULD GET OUR HABDS ON SOME REAL OIL..
Reply
SEEING AS HOW ARANBIA IS THE BIGGEST SUPPLIER OF TERRORISTS
IN THE WORLD--WE WOULD BE DOING THE WORLD A FAVOR..AND WE WOULD HAVE SOME REAL OIL/..MAYBE EVEN ENOUGH--TO SELL SOME TO FRANCE??? OF COURSE THE BUSHS WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE THAT, AS THEY ARE FRIENDS OF THE SAUDIS,,BUT--WHAT THE HEY...ALLS FAIR IN LOVE, AND WAR..-
100%
qantumreflection9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Interesting depiction of yet another challenge to the Constituion and President. This time, over who is in control of the military and who is Commander In Chief. The way the Constituion has been handled these past few years, no wonder why faith and trust in that document is wearing thin by those who hold any sort of power.
Reply
Then again, it may be hyperbole yet again. Spin, spin and spin! Does anyone really want an independent and powerful military calling the shots. Thats actually scarier than Cheney still in power.
-
-
100%
Natureboy9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Obama is standing firm on his campaign promise to withdraw all combat troops within 16 months of his inauguration."
Reply
Nobody reads the fine print these days. Obama said that he would leave a residual force, and his advisors said that force may be as many as 50,000 troops - which would make his withdrawal not a withdrawal in fact but a fifty percent reduction. -
43%
4thchance9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have a new stance,
Reply
We should withdraw or military from all countries and bring ever soldier home. Let's just let all these countries figure things out on their own and fend for themselves. Besides, we may be needing all our soldiers here at home soon.-
-
FrauBlucherComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
100%
Justice4All9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"According to Porter, the military has already begun its public relations campaign to paint recent events in Iraq in their favor, meanwhile setting Obama up for the fall in the future."
Reply
I think that last line sums it up. Iraq is a huge mess. All that's left is CYA, find someone to blame. This way they can blame Obama.
It would be funny if Obama gave them everything they wanted. Who would they blame when they failed? -
-
-
0%
Calypso5619 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is quite apparent to me, as viewing some of these posts, that some of you would rather have the muslims take over OUR country, and we would be fighting them in our OWN backyards. As far as I can see, if hussein closes gitmo these dogs will be loose, and some of them that have already been released are back in the lead of their terrorist networks. As far as hussein changing the oath of the military from the Constitution to something HE made up!!! WOW!!! This man MUST think he's God. I hope these fine men and women that give their ALL to protect us, say NO to his methods of madness. Hussein is a scary man, and he is going to 'change' this country to a socialist nation where HE is in control of everything, including ALL of our lives and the choices we are able to make or not make. This man needs to be impeached NOW!!!
Reply
-
-
-
100%
gogertyl9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is time we got out of Iraq, Pres Obama is right to ask for withdrawal, after dealing with the secrecy and lies from the previous Administration, we need to start to bail out of that situation,especially since we are facing tough economic times in this country. The General needs to be cognizant of these facts,General Eisenhower stated at one time that Professional Soldiers are so afraid of not being in the mix that they create more drama than necessary, I am beginning to believe that, There is a fear of an underemployed commander, what I am going to do now. Send those poor military personnel home so they can start to help re-build our own country. ASAP Pmg
Reply-
0%
Hhussk9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama stated he would listen to his advisors. All the advisors are telling him that it would be a mistake to remove troops on his timetable.
Reply
Obama has no experience with the military or foreign affairs, and probably should spend a little more time listening to the advisors with the actual data related to Iraq, than the soundbytes repeated in the media. -
SandmonsterComment removed: Hard Banned
-
More News
LA Times
A story of shock, chaos and bravery unfolds in Ft. Hood shooting
Historic healthcare overhaul passes House
Afghanistan government says foreign officials are interfering
Unemployment rate rises above 10% ; Obama signs jobless benefit extension
Jason Rodriguez : Shooting at downtown Orlando office building leaves 5 hurt, 1 dead
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.