Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by rockape34, Apr 11, 2008.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
I read this and also watched Petreaus when he sat at the committee. I have a great deal of respect for the man's capabilities as a leader.
One thing I did not like that he did is explain his position. I understand he is in a very tough position by trying to appear neutral before any of his "potential" new bossed but some of the answers he was giving were insane.
The conditions for withdrawal will be met when the conditions are met??
I know he has a doctorate but he needs to explain at a 5th grade level why he can't say on tv aired around the globe what the conditions for leaving would be. He needed to remind the oh so smart senators that giving them the conditions also gives the enemy an exact roadmap as to what they need to do to cause us to *not* meet those conditions.
I think he needed to educate them a little more on what OPSEC is and why it exists and why they need to be held just as accountable to it as any other involved in military ventures.
The problem with the Iraq situation is that it has a 'domestic baggage' handicap. It is an unpopular war, with the added dimension that it was started by using a false premise of WMD. Having said all that, it does not alter the fact that the US and ourselves are there to do a job. It is not just a simple question of pulling the troops out, so beloved by politicians seeking popularity during an election year.
There are serious matters to consider. The Iraqi people themselves and the economic interests of those people and ourselves in the West. What would happen to those US and UK companies engaged in economic reconstruction and development, if the troops were pulled out for political expediancy? I think the situation would descend into a form of civil war, with the loss of all the allies had done since the invasion. This would be a terrible set-back and alter the geo-political situation in the area.
Gen. Petraeus has got a tough job and he is trying to be diplomatic when dealing with politicans, especially in public view. They can 'grandstand', like Hillary Clinton, who would say anything to get elected, but is meaningless in reality.
We should be in for the long haul, if required, unless the politicans sell their morality and commonsense for the sake of power at the ballot box.
I like these fragments
Is that sarcasm Serg?
Seriously. who read this article with a straight face..?
Although Gen P, has achieved good things. The Iraqis havent started worshiping Americans..not yet(will they ever?). This is the kinda reporting id expect from fox news et all.
I think you have to take the PERSONAL viewpoints of the Iraqi troops he quotes as they are. If you see your mentors act as you wish you could, perform as you could, and protect your fellow nationals as you could, of course you would look up in admiration. This in no way contradicts with the general negative Iraqi opinion of the US.
Not read much Michael Yon, then?
Read this one... and I like my news Without the massive helping of shove it in your face patriotism.
You'll also note that he mentioned the arrogence of the Administration in the early stages of the war that helped alienate the powerful players (like the Sheiks and Iraqi Army).
Since you don't seem to have read much of Michael's work, you should know some things. In 2005, he accurately described Iraq as being in a Civil War. This put him on the receiving end of several right wing pundits who didn't want to hear it. In 2006, he went to Afghanistan, and reported on Helmand while Camp Bastion was still being built. He warned that the Taliban had regrouped, and that Allied forces in Southern Afghanistan were underequipped and undermanned, and that some outposts looked vulnerable to being over-run by the Taliban (it was not long before the Taliban spring Offensive). When American pundits called the Squaddies in Basra cowardly surrender monkeys, Michael reported on the combat they were seeing, about the conditions they worked in, and about the progress that those underappreciated soldiers had made. He's also published some worrying articles about corruption in the Iraqi National Police.
Michael Yon is a friend of ARRSE (the article I wrote for him on ARRSE is down at the moment, but I'm working on getting in touch with his webmaster). I personally found this article a little heavy handed myself, but I know he's reporting based on what he's seen on the ground. He doesn't have a monopoly on truth, and this article should not be taken as the gold standard, but it is not to be ignored.
Small side line - I have just finished reading his latest book. Well recommended if you want an insight not formed in Washington or London
I'm always open to new insightful reporters who know what they are talking about. I would like to recommend Robert Fisk's the War for civilisation. A must read if we try to begin to understand whats happening and why.
I would not trust Fisk to know the truth if it bit Him on the leg and wouldn't let go. He reports what the arab nations tell Him without bothering to check the facts.
An example of His reporting skills came in the last Israeli/Hezbollah conflict when He reported about Israel using DU and a secret aluminium bomb.
This led to the UN releasing a statement saying that there was NO evidence of Israel using DU
I would encourage you to read his reports from Basra.
If,God forbid,Hilary Clinton is elected as the 44th President of the United States and impliments what she has been on about in Iraq,that is to commence to pull out US combat troops,this will have the effect of handing over Iraq to Al-Qaida and/or the Iranians on a plate.
The other Democratic contender,Barak Obama appears to have a similar agenda,but I'm not sure how far he is prepared to act in withdrawing troops from Iraq.
If Iraq does fall to Al Qaida,what will happen to the Gulf states and the price of oil?.
Be scared,be very scared if Hilary Clinton becomes the 44th President of the United States.
Separate names with a comma.