What Does Patreaus Know?

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,827
1,790
I mean, should Congress read this?


http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/Transcript_Page.aspx?ContentGuid=484182dc-bf7c-42a7-ac74-9e270a9ef0f2

HH: Welcome, General. You took over command of the multinational forces in February of this year, February 10. In the past five months, how have conditions in Iraq changed?

DP: Well, obviously, we have been surging our forces during that time. We have added five Army brigade combat teams, two Marine battalions, and a Marine expeditionary unit, and some enablers, as they’re called. And over the last month, that surge of forces has turned into a surge of offensive operations. And we have achieved what we believe is a reasonable degree of tactical momentum on the ground, gains against the principal near-term threat, al Qaeda-Iraq, and also gains against what is another near-term threat, and also potentially the long term threat, Shia militia extremists as well. As you may have heard, that today, we announced the capture of the senior Iraqi leader of al Qaeda-Iraq, and that follows in recent weeks the detention of some four different emirs, as they’re called, the different area leaders of al Qaeda, six different foreign fighter facilitators, and a couple dozen other leaders, in addition to killing or capturing hundreds of other al Qaeda-Iraq operatives.

HH: Do you think al Qaeda in Iraq is buckling, General Petraeus?

DP: Well, it’s probably too soon to say that, but we think that we have them off plan. Now having said that, they clearly retain and have demonstrated, tragically in recent, the past week or so, the ability to continue to carry out sensational attacks. They continue to demonstrate the ability to counterattack against our forces, and those of our coalition partners. But the detention, or the capture or killing of the number of leaders that we have taken out in recent months, and weeks, actually, and the progress in terms of just clearing areas of them…as you know, Anbar Province has really become quite relatively clear of al Qaeda. Eastern Anbar still has some, and we are working in that area. We have recently cleared Western Baquba, which was almost al Qaeda central, the capitol of the new caliphate that they have tried to establish here in Iraq. So there has been considerable progress against them, but they do continue to receive foreign fighters through Syria, who become suicide bombers in many cases, and they do certainly have an ability to regenerate, to regroup, and to come back at us.

HH: General Petraeus, we’ve seen messages passed back and forth between al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and al Qaeda in Iraq. Do you consider them to be operating jointly?

DP: Well, there certainly is a level of direction that takes place, and there is a level of reporting from Iraq that goes back, and it does go back and forth. And periodically, you’ll see one of those released. More recently, as an example of the kind of direction, actually given by individuals coming into Iraq, there were the, we announced the killing of two, and it turns out three, actually, al Turki brothers. These are, not surprisingly, from Turkey originally, part of al Qaeda leadership, spent time in Afghanistan in past years, and were sent into Northern Iraq to help shore up the network up there after it took significant blows, particularly in the Mosul area. And we’ve managed to get the final fifty meters, if you will, on them after sort of pursuing them for some months, and did kill them several weeks ago.

HH: Do you see any evidence, General, that al Qaeda is now operating jointly with the Iranian regime? There’ve been some reports that in fact, they are now based, in some respects, within Iran and operating across the border with Iran.

DP: Well, there is an al Qaeda affiliate, I think is the best way to put it. Certainly, they’re under the overall banner of al Qaeda, an element formerly Ansar al Sunna, some of their members, another group affiliated with al Qaeda, that is located in Northwestern Iran, just east of the Iraqi border, east of the Iraqi-Kurdish province of Sulaymaniyah. They have come into Iraq. Our operators and Iraqi operators have conducted strikes against them. And we believe, in fact, that Iran may have actually taken some steps against them as well. They’re not sitting there at the invitation of Iran, but it’s a very, very rugged area, and a fairly substantial area as well.

HH: General Petraeus, some of your staff have talked in recent weeks about Iranian government support for various elements of the enemy in Iraq, in the form of sophisticated explosives, some training. Has the amount of material and training from Iran to the enemy in Iraq increased or decreased over the past half year?

DP: Well, it’s hard to say. It certainly has not decreased, and it’s hard to say whether it’s increased or not, but it has remained very substantial. It’s something we track, sometimes we’re able to interdict some of it, sometimes we capture it or literally stop it. We captured, for example the other day, several dozen rockets that were all set up on timers, and aimed at one of our bases, and some of our air assets happened to see them, and we were able to defuse them, all clearly from Iran. Iran has indeed provided substantial funding, training, equipping, arming, and even direction, in some cases, to what are called the special groups or secret cells affiliated with the militia of Muqtada al Sadr. We captured the heads of the secret cells, as you may recall, several months ago, the Khazali brothers. And with them, we captured a senior Lebanese Hezbollah trainer, the deputy head of the Lebanese Hezbollah department that was apparently created to help the Iranian Quds force, the element that does provide this training, equipping, money and direction to the Iraqi secret groups, or secret cells.

HH: General, what do you perceive to be Iran’s strategy in Iraq via that support and their other initiatives inside the new Iraq?

DP: Well, there are various theories on that, and one of those is actually that they may be somewhat conflicted. On the one hand, they should see a neighbor that is, that shares the same religious sect, fellow Shia, although Iraqis certainly are Arabs, and Iranians are obviously Persian. They should see a country that with which they actually already have considerable commercial trade and exchange, and great interest in, in that regard, but they also see a country that has certainly ties to the United States, and one whose democracy is very, very different from the form of government, of course, that you find in Iran, where the senior clerics actually run the country, as you know. And so they, there is discussion about whether they are trying, in a sense, to use certain elements to Hezbollah. Hezbollah is in certain parts of Iran. If they just don’t…or Iraq…if they just don’t want Iraq to do that well, perhaps, certainly want to give the United States a black eye, a variety of different motivations, we believe. And again, perhaps even a degree of confliction, given that a number of Iraq’s senior leaders has close ties to Iran in the past, located in Iran during Saddam’s day, and certainly have close relationships with various Iranian leaders, and share the religious sect of Shia Islam as well.

HH: Do you have the authority that you need, General, for hot pursuit, or to take the defensive actions necessary to protect American troops and the Iraqi government from Iranian intermeddling?

DP: Well, we certainly have the authority that we need to conduct operations in Iraq against anyone who threatens our forces or Iraqi forces. And in fact, we have done that, as I think you know…

HH: Right.

DP: We detained, for example, five members of the Iranian Quds force that were in Iran, and that we believe were tied into this greater network that has provided this arming, funding, training and direction to the secret cells or special groups associated with Sadr’s militia.

...
 
and a diplomat's side of things:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070719/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

U.S. diplomat sees some progress in Iraq

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 52 minutes ago

The top U.S. diplomat in Iraq said Thursday that Baghdad is making some political progress but faces considerable difficulty in the months to come to try to heal a nation long gripped by violence.

"If there is one word, I would use to sum up the atmosphere in Iraq — on the streets, in the countryside, in the neighborhoods and at the national level — that word would be fear," Ryan Crocker told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"For Iraq to move forward at any level, that fear is going to have to be replaced with some level of trust, confidence and that is what the effort at the national level is about," he added, speaking by video link from Baghdad.

In the first hour of his testimony, Crocker said Bush's troop buildup in Iraq was just now hitting its stride and was showing some gains in tamping down sectarian violence in Baghdad. Crocker also warned against a withdrawal of U.S. troops, contending such a move could increase sectarian attacks and create a "comfortable operating environment" for al-Qaida, which continues to organize high-profile bombings.


He also warned lawmakers against relying heavily on a list of benchmarks to measure gains made in Iraq. Earlier this year, Congress asked the White House to report on progress made in 18 target areas for political, security and diplomatic reforms; last week, the administration reported mixed results.

"The longer I am here, the more I am persuaded that progress in Iraq cannot be analyzed solely in terms of these discreet, precisely defined benchmarks because, in many cases, these benchmarks do not serve as reliable measures of everything that is important — Iraqi attitudes toward each other and their willingness to work toward political reconciliation," Crocker said.
...
 
I've been hearing for four years from Bush adminstration officials, Bush generals, and Bush fans about the great "progress" we're making.

Game over. Nobody who is remotely connected with bush has any credibility anymore.
 
I've been hearing for four years from Bush adminstration officials, Bush generals, and Bush fans about the great "progress" we're making.

Game over. Nobody who is remotely connected with bush has any credibility anymore.

You haven't a clue how the Military works or the State Department do you?
 
You haven't a clue how the Military works or the State Department do you?

Get of your high horse, and don’t’ strut around like you know how everything works. You’ve been wrong from day one on Iraq. Your credibility on iraq is zero. Its about the same as Sean Hannity’s.

BTW to answer your question: Here’s what the former head of both the State Dept. and the Miltary says about your war in Iraq…he knows about five thousand percent more about how State and the Military work, than you do:

COLIN POWELL: “I tried to avoid this war," Powell said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado. "I took him (Bush) through the consequences of going into an Arab country and becoming the occupiers."

"It is not a civil war that can be put down or solved by the armed forces of the United States.” All the military could do", Powell suggested, was put “a heavier lid on this pot of boiling sectarian stew”.

“The civil war will ultimately be resolved by a test of arms,” he said. “It’s not going to be pretty to watch, but I don’t know any way to avoid it. It is happening now.”

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/07/hbc-90000462
 
I've been hearing for four years from Bush adminstration officials, Bush generals, and Bush fans about the great "progress" we're making.

Game over. Nobody who is remotely connected with bush has any credibility anymore.

Let's see weve overthrown a Government, turned the insurgent tribes against AQ in Iraq, Captured the top AQ official in Iraq. Killed and captured thousands of AQ terrorists but your right we haven't accomplished anything. Weve done more in the 6 months after the 9/11 attacks to fight Terrorism then Bill Clinton did in 8 years in office. You would just let your hatred of a Republican President blind you to that.
 
Nope and it's a bad idea at this point. We have accomplished a lot and continue to accomplish more and more everyday.


medic:

why do you think that Iraqi sunnis and shiites, who have hated one another for 1200 years and who have NEVER been able to peacefully coexist in a democracy, will start wanting to now?
 
medic:

why do you think that Iraqi sunnis and shiites, who have hated one another for 1200 years and who have NEVER been able to peacefully coexist in a democracy, will start wanting to now?

They can do it without violence and that is what we need to get them to realize.
 
They can do it without violence and that is what we need to get them to realize.

That is what, in your opinion, we may NEED to do....but in my opinion, it is something that armies from a western, mostly caucasian, mostly christian nation has absolutely ZERO chance of being ABLE to do.
 
Get of your high horse, and don’t’ strut around like you know how everything works. You’ve been wrong from day one on Iraq. Your credibility on iraq is zero. Its about the same as Sean Hannity’s.

BTW to answer your question: Here’s what the former head of both the State Dept. and the Miltary says about your war in Iraq…he knows about five thousand percent more about how State and the Military work, than you do:

What you should have said was: "Don't hold me to higher understandings when all I want is to stomp my feet and whine and complain!"
 
Do Sunni and Shiite live in Europe in the same countries? Do they live in Canada or the US? If the answer is yes then the claim they can not peacefully coexists in a "democracy" is simply wrong.
 
Do Sunni and Shiite live in Europe in the same countries? Do they live in Canada or the US? If the answer is yes then the claim they can not peacefully coexists in a "democracy" is simply wrong.

do they coexist in any democracy where they are anything other than a minuscule minority?

Jesus....attempting to equate a situation where a handful of sunnis and a handful of shiites immigrate to an overwhelmingly non-muslim well established democracy - with a scenario of 17 million shiites and 9 million sunnis in a country with an overwhelming muslim population and NO experience with democracy - is just plain intellectually dishonest and, actually, quite laughable.

Is that your best pitch?
 

Forum List

Back
Top