Biden: Petraeus Is "Dead Flat Wrong" On Progress In Iraq
Joe Biden appears to be the first Democratic candidate, among those currently in the Senate, to directly take on the image of General Petraeus that has been cultivated by the White House, calling the general's picture of progress in Iraq "dead flat wrong." From this morning's Meet The Press:
MR. RUSSERT: General Petraeus said in a letter to his troops that we have not had the political reconciliation we thought we would have at this time. It’s been much slower, but there is some hope. And then he added this: “My sense is that we have achieved tactical momentum and wrested the initiative from our enemies in a number areas of Iraq. We are, in short, a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field.” Is that what you expect him to say tomorrow?SEN. BIDEN: I expect him to say that. And I really respect him. And I think he’s dead flat wrong. The fact of the matter is that there is — that this idea of these security gains we’ve made have had no impact on the underlying sectarian dynamic. None. None whatsoever. And when I met in—I’ll tell you what I saw. I met with the two vice presidents—one Shia, one Sunni. Both agreed that the only way this is going to work is to give more local control. The only way it’s going to happen. The only way there’s any possibility of dealing with the sectarian violence is you’ve got to separate the parties, give them some breathing room, give them local control.
Comments (23)
pol wrote on September 9, 2007 5:36 PM:It's about time.
slb wrote on September 9, 2007 5:40 PM:Tactical success does not necessarily boil down to strategic success. And that is exactly what Biden is pointing out when he says, "...these security gains we’ve made have had no impact on the underlying sectarian dynamic. None. None whatsoever."
Tactical success that does not advance the strategic goal is of no real use whatsoever. (I suppose it serves to make the Boy King look like he is doing something, but should American soldiers be dying just to make Bush look good?)
(By the way, is it just me, or does the "Remember personal info" option here not work? It works for me on the TPMMuckraker pages, but not here. I'm getting tired of having to re-enter it every time, and I'm tempted to start posting anonymously. And while I'm at it, why do we have three different comment formats on the TPM site??)
Mellifluous wrote on September 9, 2007 6:02 PM:Well, Mr. Biden, you really respect him. And you expect him to say what Russert said. And he is dead flat wrong (and some more of our soldiers will be flat dead.)
Why is it that you respect him, again?
garhane wrote on September 9, 2007 6:10 PM:You guys down in the States better get moving.
I do not know what keeps the Bush Bunny moving but he is moving and drumming and and he is going to plunge the whole show into blood and crap.
Nobody has the time to sweat about terminology or shadings, or positioning oneself. Somebody has got to get moving and IMPEACH or it is over.
mcboo wrote on September 9, 2007 6:11 PM:We are, in short, a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field.
My how seasonal your analogy is my dear general. If only you had finished your football story -
"...our QB's arm is broken, our running back has a concussion, the head coach can't tell his ass from his elbow and that movement we're doing with the ball? Well we're actually heading towards the wrong end zone. Hell, it is GREEN end zone so it could be worse. But hey, enough about all that, don't our cheerleaders sure look purty?"
Bill W wrote on September 9, 2007 6:25 PM:here's the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbYBz4zWRLI
Lost any respect for Petraeus when he turned into a partisan political PR tool who is using his abilities and name to sell a military policy instead of reporting on one.
dhs wrote on September 9, 2007 6:45 PM:I gave up on Biden when he voted to continue funding the war last Spring, with no conditions attached. It would be nice to see him take some real action, like join his fellow Presidential aspirants in the Senate in filibustering the toothless funding bill that Harry Reid is threatening to bring to the floor.
The Democrats seem to be bleeding credibility by the hour.
Daniel wrote on September 9, 2007 6:48 PM:Democrats are definitely going at it this week around the Iraq issue. Dodd led the field in opposing the Levin-Reed amendment, and the blogosphere pressured the other candidates to do the same. The rhetoric is now increasing, with people like Biden taking on Iraq policy.
More at Campaign Diaries. stlounick wrote on September 9, 2007 7:21 PM:Biden also said on MTP that he would vote for funding the war. And he was dead certain about it.
kentuck wrote on September 9, 2007 7:35 PM:No! No! No! You cannot say that! Nobody is supposed to question the General. The White House has been cultivating this report for the last 6 months and they do not need a lowly Senator challenging their "report" or their General.
Biden has opened himself up to a full frontal assault from talk radio tomorrow. How dare he! How dare he challenge the General that knows more than anybody - even the President. Perhaps he can claim temporary insanity?
Official A wrote on September 9, 2007 7:50 PM:Biden said,"This is the president’s war,” and “Unless we get 67 votes to override his veto, there’s nothing we can do to stop this war, but we must, we must, we must protect these troops.”
Any one who saw this surely felt the heat from Biden's flaming trousers right through the TV screen. That is a monumental lie endorsed by a party establishment that has decided a hoped-for (but by no means certain) sweep in 2008 is worth a few thousand soldiers' lives and billions of dollars.
If they wanted the war to end, it would already be over. Fifty votes cuts off funding.
Offcial A wrote on September 9, 2007 7:55 PM:Biden is on the front lines in a campaign to pull the wool over disgruntled Democrats. This 2/3 shit is...well...shit. They should just say, "We want to be re-elected worse than we want to end the war." At least it would be honest. Of course, they might perpetuate the war and lose in 2008 anyway. Then we'll have a mess on our hands for sure.
Do the right thing for once, Joe, and cease the posturing.
VictorLaszlo wrote on September 9, 2007 8:06 PM:Official A: "Fifty votes cuts off funding."
This needs to be tattooed backward on the forehead of every Senate Democrat.
RandyR wrote on September 9, 2007 8:44 PM:
It is no longer a case of who is right or wrong. The only way to stop this madness is to pull funding. No negoate on withdrawl, no money, there is no other way.
BIDEN TAKES A STAND
on a "No duh" topic . . . News at . . . Well . . . Never. Biden is almost as disappointing on a regular basis as my Congressperson, Representative Berman. He does dress in good suits though.
oleeb wrote on September 9, 2007 10:27 PM:I'm glad Biden is calling a spade a spade in this case. The question is whether he and other Senate Democrats will not only maintain this clear position on what is going on, but then follow up by telling, not asking or negotiating but telling Petraeus and the administration how things are going to be from now on.
That too, should be very clear and go something like this: 1. a plan for phased withdrawal to be completed by Labor Day next shall be in the hands of the Congress by October 15, 2. there will be no further military appropriations passed by the congress in either house until the plan is received and no funds will be spent by the US military in Iraq other than those necessary for the secutrity of our forces and their safe passage out of the country according to the timetable established in the plan for withdrawal.
Only when the congressional D's have the courage to proceed thusly or very nearly thusly will there be any progress made toward getting the hell out of that place. We should never, ever have invaded Iraq. It was the most ill-advised and disasterous US military move since the Little Big Horn.
The Mad Hatter wrote on September 9, 2007 11:19 PM:--Does it really take 60 votes in the Senate to cut off funding for the war? asked Alice.
-- No, it would only take 51, said the Mad Hatter.
--Why 51? asked Alice.
--Because a 50-50 tie would have to be broken by the President of Vice, said the Mad Hatter
--Who is that? asked Alice
--Darth Vader, said the Mad Hatter. And he will vote for the war. On the other hand, spending bills originate in the House.
--Wouldn't you think that Nancy would oppose a bill that funded the war with no restrictions? asked Alice.
-- No, said the Mad Hatter. Because if the Democrats end the war, they lose their best campaign issue in the next election. And the Republicans will all accuse them of losing the war.
-- Is that fair to the soldiers? asked Alice.
-- Silly girl, said the Mad Hatter. Only the voters are thinking of the soldiers.
WAITING FOR PETRAEUS
QUESTIONS FOR CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS TO ASK GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS
During the first few months of 2007 the Bush Administration’s answer to Congress when asked when are we going to start withdrawing American troops from Iraq was “wait until September.” Wait for the report from General David Petraeus, the general selected by the President to run the war in Iraq. The general who will tell America whether or not the surge of additional troops sent to Iraq was working. The obvious implication was that General Petraeus would faithfully and accurately report the whole truth about the success or failure of President Bush’s decision to send in additional combat troops to secure Iraq. The message from the President was that after the general gave his report, the Democrats who now run Congress would then be able to decide whether to continue to support the President’s strategy or whether to start a withdrawal of our troops.
That directive from the Bush Administration- to hold off criticism until September, to hold off taking meaningful actions to end the war and just give the surge a chance to secure the peace in Iraq- that directive was the beginning of a shell game being played on America. I say “shell game” because the last few months, as every objective measure has indicated that violence is on the increase, that Iraq’s political situation- which is essential to a peaceful solution to the country’s problems- is disintegrating, that security is non-existent in most of the country while the infrastructure is still a shambles-- as all that has occurred even with the “surge,” the Presidential rhetoric has shifted once again.
Recently, the President has suggested that Iraq is just like Vietnam, but not in the way that most rational people would assume. He says we shouldn’t pull out of Iraq when all indications are that the surge is working– just like those defeatist Democrats did in Vietnam when we were on the cusp of victory. When asked in Australia at the APEC meeting how things were going in Iraq, his surrealistic response was “we’re kicking ass!” President Bush neglected to mention, as Bill Maher astutely pointed out, that if we really were kicking ass and the surge had worked, he wouldn’t have had to fly into the country secretly, spend every minute of his time in Iraq on our most secure air base, Al Asad, nicknamed “Camp Cupcake” by the Marines who serve there, and he wouldn’t have needed Iraq’s President al Maliki to secretly fly from Baghdad to meet him there.
Notwithstanding the mountain of objective evidence that the stated goals of the surge- the “18 benchmarks”-- have not been met (supposedly three were, but none of them involved the most critical- such as having movement forward on a political reconciliation and having the security situation improve so that ordinary Iraqis can safely live in their homes and drive on the streets), the spineless crapweasel Democrats will continue to hem and haw and avoid making an actual decision to pull the plug. They could end the war tomorrow if they so chose by cutting off the cash flow which is the necessity for the continuation of a war which has killed several hundred thousand Iraqis-- no one knows the actual number because the Bush Administration refuses to count-- over 4,000 Americans in uniform, and wounded and maimed tens of thousands of Americans, while costing the nation upwards of $500 billion, with $4 billion thrown down the sewer every week.
So as a public service to the nation, I have some suggested questions for Democrats in Congress to ask General Petraeus when he appears before them and gives them two self-contradictory messages: the surge is working, violence is down, and victory is in sight-- but if we stage an orderly withdrawal over the next 12 months, Iraq is so fragile it will immediately descend into chaos, overt civil war, genocide, and become a failed state and a haven for international terrorism targeting America.
The questions are easy to ask, and any competent commanding general should have made it his business to know the answers:
General Petraeus, what was the population of Iraq before we invaded in March of 2003?
What is Iraq’s population now?
How many Iraqis have fled the country since we invaded it in 2003, toppled their government, and occupied the country?
How many of the remaining Iraqis are involved in acts of violence, including the insurgency and sectarian violence between and within religious sects?
What are the names of each organization which has engaged in acts of violence against United States troops in Iraq in the last 12 months?
How many insurgents are members of the Al Qaida organization which takes direct orders from Osama Bin Laden?
What is/are the name of the top leader(s) of the Al Qaida organization in Iraq?
How many members of Al Qaida in Iraq are Iraqis?
Of those members of Al Qaida in Iraq who are Iraqi, how many of them were members of Al Qaida before we invaded in 2003?
How many members of Al Qaida in Iraq are foreign nationals?
What foreign countries do they come from, and what are the numbers who come from each of those countries?
Of those members of Al Qaida in Iraq who are foreign nationals, how many of them were members of Al Qaida before we invaded in 2003?
How many insurgents are nationalities other than Iraqi?
What is the breakdown in numbers by religion of the insurgents in Iraq (i.e. how many are Sunni, how many are Shia, how many are other)?
What is the geographic breakdown of the insurgents in Iraq, as in how many are there in each province?
General, are all Iraqis found dead from gunshot wounds counted by the American military when compiling statistics as to the effects of the surge?
General, are all Iraqis killed by explosives counted by the American military when compiling statistics as to the effects of the surge?
What provinces have experienced acts of violence committed by insurgents against American or coalition forces in the last 12 months?
What provinces have not experienced acts of violence committed by insurgents against American or coalition forces in the last 12 months?
How many of the insurgents who exist in 2007 were actively involved in violence against Americans before we invaded in March of 2003?
How many Iraqis oppose retaining America’s military presence there?
How many Iraqis, while not actively involved in violence towards America’s troops, do not object to attacks on American troops?
How many billions of dollars in cash did the United States government airlift or otherwise send to Iraq after our invasion in 2003?
How much of that is missing?
Who got the missing cash?
How much of that missing cash has been used to fuel the insurgency and to attack and kill American troops?
How many weapons that were handed out to Iraq’s police forces and Iraq’s army have gone missing?
How many of those missing weapons have been used to attack American troops or kill Iraqis in sectarian violence?
What is the total number of Iraq’s police forces?
How many of Iraq’s police have been killed in 2007? In 2006? In 2005? 2004? 2003? 2002 (before we invaded)?
How many Iraqi police officers can be counted on to impartially enforce the law rather than participating in the insurgency, in sectarian violence, or in criminal acts?
What is the total number of Iraq’s combat forces?
How many of Iraq’s combat forces can be counted on to impartially enforce the law rather than participating in the insurgency, in sectarian violence, or in criminal acts?
In the last six months, how many of Iraq’s combat troops have been “stand alone” and have carried out missions without active American troop support or American military advisors accompanying them?
What was the civilian population in Baghdad in August of 2007?
What is the average high daytime temperature in Baghdad in August?
How do Baghdad’s Iraqi civilians cool their homes?
General, during the month of August of 2007, how many hours a day on the average was electricity on in homes in Baghdad? In August of 2006? 2005? 2004? 2003? 2002 (before we invaded)?
How many hours a day is electricity on in your headquarters?
How many acts of sabotage were committed against Iraq’s electrical grid in the last 12 months?
Who was guarding Iraq’s electrical generators and grid systems in those 12 months?
How many acts of sabotage were committed against Iraq’s oil pipelines in the last 12 months?
Who was guarding Iraq’s oil pipelines in those 12 months?
Is the drinking water in homes in Baghdad safe to drink?
Would you advise Americans to drink the tap water from civilian homes in Baghdad?
General, my friend’s daughter is planning on visiting Iraq next month. Can you tell me what hotel you recommend she stay in outside the Green Zone and the names of some stores where she can shop without needing a security detail of U.S. Marines and attack helicopters?
General, if an American tourist wishes to take his family to Iraq, wearing clothing adorned with American flags, and without bodyguards or a military escort, which cities would you recommend they not visit, not stay in, and not go shopping in?
What would an American tourist’s life expectancy be in minutes if he walked the streets of Baghdad during the daytime?
Can you name any member of the Iraqi Parliament who can walk on the streets in Baghdad, wearing some insignia identifying himself as a member of the Parliament, without body guards, who has more than a 50 percent chance of returning alive?
Name every city in Iraq in which the mayor and city council members may walk the streets safely in the daytime without body guards?
Name every city where it is not safe for the mayor and city council members to walk the streets safely in the daytime without body guards.
Are Iraqi women who are not dressed in traditional Muslim clothing safer walking the streets today, or were they safer on March 19, 2003, before we invaded?
What percentage of your patrol vehicles have armor that will withstand improvised explosive devices planted in the street?
How many more IED resistant vehicles do you need?
How many have you ordered?
How many were delivered?
How many citizens of Iraq died from acts of violence there in 2000? 2001? 2002? 2003? 2004? 2005? 2006? 2007? What were the numbers who died from disease or hunger during each of those years?
How many Iraqis left their homes in 2000? 2001? 2002? 2003? 2004? 2005? 2006? 2007?
How many Iraqis left the country in 2000? 2001? 2002? 2003? 2004? 2005? 2006? 2007?
Are American troops in Iraq to provide democracy to the country?
Are the people of Iraq are free to choose their own fate or is their future being dictated by American military and civilian authorities?
Do you have any objection to asking Iraq’s government to schedule an election to allow the Iraqi people to vote: American troops are to leave within 12 months, or stay in Iraq for years to come?
What is America’s mission in Iraq?
When will that mission be accomplished so that all American troops may come home?
General Petraeus, how many nuclear weapons have American forces discovered in Iraq?
How many facilities capable of making nuclear weapons were discovered by American forces in Iraq?
One final question, General Petraeus: how many of the 20 9-11 hijackers were Iraqis?
NJ Lawyer wrote on September 10, 2007 1:38 AM:
Joe Biden is the anti-Joementum, no matter what Atrios says.
Michael Caine wrote on September 10, 2007 1:44 AM:Actually, it only takes 41 votes in the Senate. 60 votes are necessary for a cloture vote. If you don't have them, you can't move a bill through the Senate whatsoever.
dndobdon wrote on September 10, 2007 10:44 AM:The Bears had a lot of "tactical success" in yesterdays game against San Diego. But they suffered an embarrassing defeat in the end.
Sully18 wrote on September 10, 2007 12:13 PM:Today would have been my Dad`s 96th birthday,had he taken care of himself.
His two grandfathers served the U.S. government proudly for 53 and 47 years respectively.One was a Civil War hero at Gettysburg who after the war served in the State Dept. till his death, and the other worked for the Bureau of Engraving, eventually becoming Director in 1904 till he died two years later.
All three would have been ashamed of our current leaders who lead without honor.They would wonder why Congress has not cut off funds for this war,as well as why the prez. and vice-prez. had not been impeached.As their ancestor,I feel much the same way.
