Democrats Cast Doubt on General Petraeus’ Surge Report Before it Comes Out
According to this story, the Democrats are already questioning General Petraeus’ report and he hasn’t even reported yet. Any good news for America in the war on terror translates to bad news for the Democrats, who have based all of their future successes on the United States failing in Iraq. This is why they must question the report before there is a report. They need to sow the seed of doubt and hope it grows into the fruit of failure in the minds of the American people.
Democrats are questioning the truthfulness of an upcoming report from Gen. David Petraeus on the progress of President Bush’s troop-surge strategy in Iraq.
“For a long time the Administration has hidden behind the name of General David Petraeus, saying the September report will be his. We all knew this would be the President’s report,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a news release on Thursday.
In other words, the speaker is telling us that the man that congress approved of to run the war is nothing but a mouthpiece to the president. Congress knew General Petraeus supported the surge, they voted for him knowing he supported the surge, then they bitched about the surge. This can only lead you to believe that the Democrats supported the surge. But why? Did they covertly support the surge by approving the general because secretly they hoped it failed, ringing the death knell for George W Bush? That is the only conclusion I can come up with.
Now that the surge appears to be working, instead of admitting they may have been wrong about the surge, the surge they effectively voted for by confirming Petraeus, they would rather try to destroy and take down the general.
Anti-war Democrats who have been pressing for a U.S. troop withdrawal for months are not expected to change their minds, although a positive assessment from Gen. Petraeus might undermine their position for a quick troop withdrawal.
That is exactly why they must work to discredit this American hero whose policies may be turning the war to our favor. The anti-war far left will never admit that we may actually win the war, so they must try to devalue anything General Petraeus says by saying he is just parroting the president’s talking points.
“When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq, it will be because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it will be good politics,” President Bush said in July. “The [troop surge] strategy I announced in January is designed to seize the initiative and create those conditions.”
And the Democrats can have none of that.
America's Watchtower 
From the L.A. Times:
Despite Bush’s repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.
————————–
So, yes, the report due in September WILL be written by the White House. This is important because Bush has no credibility on Iraq beyond his base, which is why a report by Petraeus was so important. Instead we have something that’s little more than another weekly radio address, and we all know how much those mean to the vast majority of the public.
—————————-
“Congress knew General Petraeus supported the surge, they voted for him knowing he supported the surge, then they bitched about the surge.”
They confirmed Petraeus for the mission that Bush had assigned him. Bush is the CIC and the confirmation process is more or less to make sure he is qualified to take the job. If Petraeus didn’t support the surge, he wouldn’t have been picked by Bush and there wouldn’t have been a confirmation vote on him. Most Democrats were sceptical of the surge and said so, but Petraeus had his mission, as assigned by Bush, and they could only reject him if they found him unfit for the job. He wasn’t and they didn’t. Still, that’s a far cry from endorsing the mission that Bush handed him.
Don’t you think it’s odd that after the Administration has gone to such lengths to associate the surge with Petraeus and make him the hero, that this report in September would NOT be written by him? What happened to “listening to the commanders on the ground”? Instead we’ll get a report written by “officials”. This is what we’ve been told to wait for?
LikeLike
With so many more people dying every day in Iraq, where is the proof that the surge is working? We’re in overload on the death toll of US soldiers and the civilian Iraqi people, but each one has a family torn apart and in mourning.
LikeLike
maureenoz:
From USA Today:
The number of truck bombs and other large al-Qaeda-style attacks in Iraq have declined nearly 50% since the United States started increasing troop levels in Iraq about six months ago, according to the U.S. military command in Iraq.
The high-profile attacks — generally large bombs hitting markets, mosques or other “soft” targets that produce mass casualties — have dropped to about 70 in July from a high during the past year of about 130 in March, according to the Multi-National Force-Iraq.
Military officers say the decline reflects progress in damaging al-Qaeda’s networks in Iraq. The military has launched offensives around Baghdad aimed at al-Qaeda sanctuaries and bases.
“The enemy had the initiative and the momentum in ’06,” said Jack Keane, a retired general who is a chief architect of the increase in troop levels and mentor to Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. “We’ve got it now.”
LikeLike