Petraeus: Idiot

JBeukema

Rookie
Apr 23, 2009
25,613
1,746
0
everywhere and nowhere
IPS — The revelation that the man presumed to be a high-ranking Taliban leader who had met with top Afghan officials was an imposter sheds new light on Gen. David Petraeus’s aggressive propaganda about the supposed Taliban approach to the Hamid Karzai regime.
Ever since August, Petraeus had been playing up the Taliban’s supposed willingness to talk peace with Karzai as a development that paralleled the success he had claimed in splitting the Sunni insurgency in Iraq in 2007.
It is now clear, however, that Petraeus was deceiving himself as well as the news media in accepting the man claiming to be the second-ranking Taliban commander, Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, as genuine, despite a number of indications to the contrary.
Petraeus’s failure to heed those signals was certainly driven by his strong desire to establish yet another narrative emphasising his brilliance as a war strategist, judging from his public statements prior to the revelation of the fraud.
The tale of self-deception began a few months ago when a man claiming to be Mullah Mansour somehow persuaded U.S. officials, including Petraeus, to help him go to Kabul to talk with Karzai. Mansour had been named, along with Abdul Qayum Zakir, to replace Mullah Baradar last March after Baradar was detained by Pakistani intelligence, according to a Taliban spokesman quoted in Newsweek.
The first warning signal that the man was an imposter was that he gave Karzai regime officials terms for peace that bore no resemblance to the public posture of the Taliban.
An Overeager Petraeus Ignored Danger Signs on Taliban Imposter | Dissident Voice
 
On the day that you do what that man does for this nation, you MIGHT get taken seriously. As it is, you got nothing other than an article - which is pretty much just one person's judgement on what happened. So, fuck you for regurgitating bitches from people who don't have the balls to do the hard shit.
 
Handing money over to anyone who claims to be taliban is 'the hard shit'?

My bad. I hadn't realized that you're such a fucking idiot that you discount the man's whole career and only consider this one incident. How stupid of me.

He's a hero. Are you?
 
it doesn't diminish his total body of work

Including being one of the guys leading a war in which 2/3 of those killed were innocent civilians?

That happens in war. Get the fuck over it. Because of men like him, our nation is free for idiots to whine about men like him. You are not fit to shine his shoes.... nor am I.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
it doesn't diminish his total body of work
Including being one of the guys leading a war in which 2/3 of those killed were innocent civilians?

That happens in war.

Really? 2/3?

Get the fuck over it.

Have you gotten the fuck over 9/11?
Because of men like him, our nation is free for idiots to whine about men like him.

What? He fought for our freedom? From whom? Who invaded? He served in the War for Independence? World War Two? He's taken up arms against the Fed- he's a traitor whose joined the right-wing militia movement?

Whom, pray tell, did he fight to free us from?
 
Including being one of the guys leading a war in which 2/3 of those killed were innocent civilians?

That happens in war.

Really? 2/3?

Get the fuck over it.

Have you gotten the fuck over 9/11?
Because of men like him, our nation is free for idiots to whine about men like him.

What? He fought for our freedom? From whom? Who invaded? He served in the War for Independence? World War Two? He's taken up arms against the Fed- he's a traitor whose joined the right-wing militia movement?

Whom, pray tell, did he fight to free us from?

His record is public. Go find out for yourself, you lazy whiny assed brat. Exactly what have YOU done for this country?
 
So... you can't back up your claims that he's fought to free us from anyone?

You can't back up your empty reichwing rhetoric?

Why am I not surprised? Par for the course with you people.
 
it doesn't diminish his total body of work

Including being one of the guys leading a war in which 2/3 of those killed were innocent civilians?

Where does your 2/3 figure come from?

How many dead civilians would you be happy with?

How many died under the Taliban?

Or the Soviets?

More than a million civilians died as Soviet forces propping up the government of Babrak Karmal waged a massive war against anti-communist mujahedeen forces.

"There was indiscriminate mass bombardment of villages for the eviction of mujahedeen," Nadery said. "Civilian casualties are not at all comparable."

Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution think tank and Afghanistan expert, said NATO forces have killed fewer than 10,000 civilians and a comparable number of insurgents
 
it doesn't diminish his total body of work
Including being one of the guys leading a war in which 2/3 of those killed were innocent civilians?

Where does your 2/3 figure come from?


Al-Jazeera, one of several news organisations provided advance access to the WikiLeaks trove, reported the documents show 285,000 recorded casualties, including at least 109,000 deaths. Of those who died 66,000, nearly two-thirds of the total, were civilians.
The Iraqi government has issued a tally claiming at least 85,694 deaths of civilians and security officials killed between January 2004 and October 31, 2008.


WikiLeaks defends Iraq war files, more Afghanistan documents to come | Perth Now


What has been uncovered often contradicts the official narrative of the conflict. For example, the leaked data shows that the US has been keeping records of Iraqi deaths and injuries throughout the war, despite public statements to the contrary.
The latest cache of files pertains to a period of six years – from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2009 – and shows that 109,000 people died during this time. Of those, a staggering 66,081 – two-thirds of the total – were civilians.
The figures are much higher than previously estimated and they will inevitably lead to an upward revision of the overall death toll of the conflict.

WikiLeaks releases secret Iraq file - Secret Iraq Files - Al Jazeera English
 
IPS — The revelation that the man presumed to be a high-ranking Taliban leader who had met with top Afghan officials was an imposter sheds new light on Gen. David Petraeus’s aggressive propaganda about the supposed Taliban approach to the Hamid Karzai regime.
Ever since August, Petraeus had been playing up the Taliban’s supposed willingness to talk peace with Karzai as a development that paralleled the success he had claimed in splitting the Sunni insurgency in Iraq in 2007.
It is now clear, however, that Petraeus was deceiving himself as well as the news media in accepting the man claiming to be the second-ranking Taliban commander, Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, as genuine, despite a number of indications to the contrary.
Petraeus’s failure to heed those signals was certainly driven by his strong desire to establish yet another narrative emphasising his brilliance as a war strategist, judging from his public statements prior to the revelation of the fraud.
The tale of self-deception began a few months ago when a man claiming to be Mullah Mansour somehow persuaded U.S. officials, including Petraeus, to help him go to Kabul to talk with Karzai. Mansour had been named, along with Abdul Qayum Zakir, to replace Mullah Baradar last March after Baradar was detained by Pakistani intelligence, according to a Taliban spokesman quoted in Newsweek.
The first warning signal that the man was an imposter was that he gave Karzai regime officials terms for peace that bore no resemblance to the public posture of the Taliban.
An Overeager Petraeus Ignored Danger Signs on Taliban Imposter | Dissident Voice
You throw up some far left wing drivel from some far left wing drivel site and run with it?

YOU!......are the idiot, Jethro.:cuckoo:

Go back to watching LINK TV, and wallow in your far left lunacy, Douchebag.
 
i wont presume to call petraeus an idiot after this, but i would call him and our political and military leadership desperate as evidenced from the lack of due diligence in this matter. we are looking for validation and indications of an end-game after nearly a decade at war.
 
IPS — The revelation that the man presumed to be a high-ranking Taliban leader who had met with top Afghan officials was an imposter sheds new light on Gen. David Petraeus’s aggressive propaganda about the supposed Taliban approach to the Hamid Karzai regime.
Ever since August, Petraeus had been playing up the Taliban’s supposed willingness to talk peace with Karzai as a development that paralleled the success he had claimed in splitting the Sunni insurgency in Iraq in 2007.
It is now clear, however, that Petraeus was deceiving himself as well as the news media in accepting the man claiming to be the second-ranking Taliban commander, Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, as genuine, despite a number of indications to the contrary.
Petraeus’s failure to heed those signals was certainly driven by his strong desire to establish yet another narrative emphasising his brilliance as a war strategist, judging from his public statements prior to the revelation of the fraud.
The tale of self-deception began a few months ago when a man claiming to be Mullah Mansour somehow persuaded U.S. officials, including Petraeus, to help him go to Kabul to talk with Karzai. Mansour had been named, along with Abdul Qayum Zakir, to replace Mullah Baradar last March after Baradar was detained by Pakistani intelligence, according to a Taliban spokesman quoted in Newsweek.
The first warning signal that the man was an imposter was that he gave Karzai regime officials terms for peace that bore no resemblance to the public posture of the Taliban.
An Overeager Petraeus Ignored Danger Signs on Taliban Imposter | Dissident Voice
You throw up some far left wing drivel from some far left wing drivel site and run with it?

YOU!......are the idiot, Jethro.:cuckoo:

Go back to watching LINK TV, and wallow in your far left lunacy, Douchebag.


:lol:

I noticed you didn't make the same troll post when PC linked to the same source
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top