Current Article

Drone on Petraeus Happy Talk

By Frank Naif on September 17, 2007 at 6:48 PM in Current Affairs

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/ Leslie

Speaking of cognitive dissonance, a new study out puts the Iraqi death toll due to violence since the US invasion at over 1 million—approaching Cambodia’s killing fields under Pol Pot. But if you ask Americans how many Iraqis they believe have been killed, they’ll say about 9,900, which is “less than a third of the number of civilian deaths confirmed by U.N. monitors in 2006 alone.”
Delia

And speaking of the Move-On ad and Republican bullshit (specifically, Rudy’s bullshit about the NYT’s giving Move-On a special cut rate for their ad): I happened to have the Ed Schulz show on while I was driving this afternoon (and I know Larry can’t stand Ed, but bear with me) and he was interviewing a representative from Move-On, who said that the NYT gave them exactly the same rate they give all other major political organizations, and Giuliani is just doing a big agitprop game. (Okay, he didn’t say agitprop, I did, but that’s what it is. Maybe swiftboating is the preferred American term.)
Canuck Stuck in Muck

No offense intended to the men and women who wear the uniforms of the US Military. However, since Westmoreland, do we have any good reason for believing that the Generals have our best interests in mind? Which begs the question: “Why should we be surprised if Gen. Betrayus is betraying us??”
mambonova

http://i11.tinypic.com/66y0yo6.jpg
IntelVet

General Patraeus gave a great presentation on military goals. I don’t care for the fellow either, but give him his due. He was in uniform because he was talking about the military. Before, he has been honest enough to point out that there will not be a political solution using the military, like attempting to force a square peg into a round hole. All one does is break the peg.

The media seems to have a problem conflating military with political goals. The admin seems to take advantage of this, highlighting differences and similarities to sell whatever they want.

The short answer is for the media to get smarter, know the differences/similarities and explain what is going on. The long answer is for blogs like yours to hold the line, pointing out the (rather gross) disparities and provide alternative, viable, solutions.

Larry, keep up the good work. You are every much a patriotic soldier. Thanks.
http://takeaction.wordpress.com/ A.Citizen

No offense intended to the men and women who wear the uniforms of the US Military. However, since Westmoreland, do we have any good reason for believing that the Generals have our best interests in mind?

I really think it past time that anyone in Free Left Blogistan gave a shit about whether or not uniformed personnel, and otherwise, of the U.S. military ‘take offense…’ at our pointing out the disgusting track record of failure, lost every major conflict and many minor ones since WWII, corruption, 10 Trillion missing from DOD coffers in the 80s and 90s, lying, ‘Light…there’s light at the end of the tunnel…I swear!’….brutality, My Lai…No Fly Zone…poison gas in Northern Iraq…..1 Million Iraqis dead at the hands of our military.

No…

I think it’s way past time we shine the light of truth, justice and the so called ‘American Way’ on what’s been going on in our name.

Quite simply….mass murder for private financial gain.

Carlyle Group anybody? Blackwater?

Time for some ‘oversight’ there you members of Congress.
Thinker

The military are fine and so would General Petraeus be, with an exception……conditions of war.

Under those conditions they are as a rule most foul. Discernment comes as an exception. Here in Australia, we have sprukers upselling down market wares outside several large stores. They have had something of a pied piper effect on the sheeple.

All those years ago when I went to marketing school, I was told that marketing strategies and military strategies were very similar. Never believed it for a second…..now I’m off to get ‘em bargains!!!
Bill Keyes

It would seem the after the General’s testimony last week that the Bushies have once again proved that they can fool most of the people all of the time.

Bush who always listens to his commanders on the ground is now postering as the reluctant leader who will convince the sheeple that he tried hard to win in Iraq but he is running out of time and the sheeple will just have to suck it up for a long haul in Iraq. So as we already know he threw out the South Korea card which the sheeple will say I guess if its kept those dirty stinkin NK Commies at bay all these years then it will work in Eye-rak to keep all those stinking al Keda types over there and not over here.

So if the Dems try again to cut off funding they might as well be cutting their throats because the talking sheeple heads will say their not supporting troops in the “permanent enduring presence” to fight off the al keda types.

The antiwar folks will dry up like the leaves of summer and the War in Iraq will slowly twist in the wind and continue on ad infinitum.

The sheeple’s attention will be on the latest OJ scandal, the McCann’s lost child in the UK, and isn’t it about time for another missing white woman?
Of course there is also a lot of sports coming with the World Series in baseball, the college rivalries and of course NFL to keep the sheeple’s attention.

So the “Gipper has won…successfully laying the Iraq War at the feet of his successor, no impeachment, no accountability no Nuremburg type trials. Oh I almost forgot one thing will happen and that is President Guiliani will pardon all of them and Bush II will ride off into the sunset on the ranch in Crawford.

End of story.
John Shreffler

Well, today’s Boston Globe has a piece up by Peter Canellos has piece up showing that if Petraeus got smeared, then “much of the American public is apparently complicit. On the eve of Petraeus’s testimony before Congress, an ABC News/Washington Post poll indicated that 53 percent of Americans were expecting the general to exaggerate progress in Iraq. And even after Petraeus’s testimony, Fox News found that a plurality of 40 percent thought Petraeus’s case was slanted toward the Bush administration, while only 35 percent thought it was “truthful and objective.” The remaining 25 percent didn’t have an opinion.”

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/09/18/petraeus_skeptics_are_legion_it_seems/

So the Petraeus sell job didn’t sell the public, though it did cow Congress, which was what it was for and is real easy to do.
mudkitty

Question for those in the know:

What are all those medals for anyway? Just how much combat has the good general seen, and how much of that was on the front lines?

Or is it impolite to ask?
John Shreffler

No actual combat. He has led troops in Haiti, Bosnia, and commanded the 101st Airmobile Div. in the 2003-04 tour in Iraq, involving follow-up on the 3rd Mech. Infantry Div.’s advance (101st got there just too late for much of the March-April 2003 fighting) and occupation of Mosul. He has a Combat Action Badge about which a commenter at a London Times story wrote:

“combat action badge? Petraeus famously has no direct combat experience. This also makes me wonder about his bronze star. my grandfather told us that we should always ask at what rank bronze and silver stars were awarded, since when they are given to soldiers above the rank of lieutenant or captain it is usually a reward for team-spirit, rather than an award for battlefield bravery………

american, long beach, california”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2426547.ece

Also see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Petraeus
Shirin

He’s seen LOTS if combat. He watches it on TV all the time!
http://NoQuarterUSA.net Larry Johnson

I don’t fault you for listening to the Ed Shultz program. I just think he’s a fatuous self-promoter and will not appear on his show. I’m glad he’s giving Move On some positive exposure.
Best
LJ
mudkitty

No actual combat? And we’re supposed to respect this politician?
Shirin

Hye, he wants to be Pres! The country can’t afford for him to risk his rear end in combat!
John Shreffler

Well he was in an area once where he was within 50 meters of incoming sniper fire in 2003 but that’s all I can find. For that he got a Bronze Star for valor. The Combat Action Badge above his chest full of ribbons says it all, as he’s an infantry officer and if he had seen real combat, he’d have a Combat Infantryman’s Badge. I gather that Generals new to combat can’t get the latter, so he had to settle for the new gong which is for being an area where you get hazardous duty pay, were under fire, and didn’t disgrace yourself. All the rest of the fruit salad are good housekeeping awards. Lots of inflation in the medals being handed out these days. Ike only wore a couple of rows.
Brenda Stewart

I so totally agree with what you have said!!!!! Thank you.
Montag

Roger Ike, General Douglas MacArthur started wearing EVERY medal he’d ever been awarded on his uniform until he saw Eisenhower walking around in a plain tunic. MacArthur thought that was more effective and copied him.

During WWII the Pentagon revoked the eligibility of Front Line Medics for the Combat Infantryman’s Badge, arguing that since they didn’t carry arms and were protected by the Red Cross they didn’t deserve it. Bill Mauldin drew a scathing cartoon about it and they were forced to restore the eligibility.
mudkitty

Wow, thank you guys, I sincerely didn’t know. I was not asking a rhetorical question.

So Petraeus has never seen a day of combat, yet he hides behind all those ribbons and medals.

The ordinary person thinks, when they see a chest full of metals that, at least, the guy has seen combat.

Says it all.

Petraeus for President…what say you?
http://ford-of-orange.renaultcareers.cn/bmw-motorcycle-shaft-drive.html Demetrios

Cool!